HF 3025 
.H32 
Copy 1 



The Trade of the Delaware District 
Before the Revolution 



A Dissertation 

Presented to the Faculty of Bryn Mawr College in Partial 

Fulfilment of the Requirements for the 

Degree of 

Doctor of Philosophy 



By MARY ALICE HANNA 



REPRINTED FROM 

THE SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN HISTORY 

1917 



The Trade of the Delaware District 
Before the Revolution 



A Dissertation 

Presented to the Faculty of Bryn Mawr College in Partial 

Fulfilment of the Requirements for the 

Degree of 

Doctor of Philosophy 



By MARY ALICE HANNA 



REPRINTED FROM 

THE SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN HISTORY 

1917 






out 

The UnWutitt? 



CONTENTS 



PAGE 

Preface 239 

CHAPTER I 

Economic Conditions in the Delaware District Before 1763 

1. Trade Boundaries 242 

2. Products and Industries 248 

3. Trade Routes 260 

4. Illicit Trade Before 1763 267 

CHAPTER II 
British Legislation, 1763-1773 

1. New Trade Regulations 275 

2. New Revenue Measures 293 

CHAPTER III 

The Effect of the British Legislation 

1. Manufactures 307 

2. Trade Statistics 310 

3. Illicit Trade After 1763 320 

Conclusion 333 

Bibliography 334 

Appendices • • 339 



PREFACE 



During the past decade there have appeared several books, 
monographs, and articles which treat colonial history from the im- 
perial and economic points of view. 1 In the light of these studies, 
there has developed a new conception of the British empire in 
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, in which the colonies 
have come to be considered primarily as parts of the empire 
rather than as the beginnings of the United States. The theory 
of the continuity of colonial policy has been placed beyond dis- 
pute. The acts of trade and navigation have been traced to their 
sources and have been given a new meaning and a new import- 
ance. Many of the acts were passed to prevent imperial disinte- 
gration and did not at the time impose any hardship upon the 
colonies, for instance, the wool act of 1699 and the iron act of 
1750. Even the measures which seemed to be most prejudicial to 
colonial interests were often the product of imperial necessity. 
The molasses act, for example, was intended primarily as a blow 
at France, and in the controversy over tea the increasing power 
of the East India Company was a more significant factor than 
the question of colonial taxation. 

An analysis of legislation from the economic and imperial 
points of view and its efTect upon the trade of the empire sug- 
gests an interesting field for investigation. Especially is this 
true of the period immediately preceding the American War of 



1 Beer, G. L., The origins of the British Colonial System, 1578-1660 
(1908). 

, The Old Colonial System, Part I, Vols. I and II. 1912. 

, British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765. (1907). 

Root, W. T., The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Govern- 
ment, 1696-1765. (1912). 

Giesecke, A. A., American Commercial Legislation before 1789. (1910). 

Andrews, C. M., Colonial Commerce — The American Historical Re- 
view, October, 1914. 

Morriss, M. S., Maryland Trade, 1689-1715. (1914). 

Lord, E. L., Industrial Experiments in the British Colonies of North 
America. (1896). 



240 Smith Cou^ge; Studies in History 

Independence. At that time England, after a long struggle with 
France for dominion in America, began to take an inventory of 
her colonial possessions and to reorganize the empire. The trade 
and navigation acts, which were originally directed against the 
Dutch, were revised to meet the needs of the time. In addition, 
other acts were passed in order to put the empire on a more self- 
sufficing basis. The effect which this reorganization produced 
is best seen by investigating the economic conditions and the trade 
of a part of the empire, and, as the American colonies presented 
the most formidable objections, a study of their trade ought to 
indicate to what extent the legislation of the period served its 
purpose. It is with the hope that some light may be thrown 
upon a few of the commercial and economic problems of the 
period that the writer ventures to present the results of her in- 
vestigation of the British trade legislation from 1763, the close 
of the Seven Years' War, to 1773, when the controversy between 
Great Britain and the American colonies lost its economic aspect 
and became more exclusively political in character. 

This study was undertaken at the suggestion of Dr. William 
Roy Smith, of Bryn Mawr College, and to him the writer is 
deeply indebted for assistance at every stage of her progress. It 
is a pleasure to mention others who have made valuable sug- 
gestions and criticisms, among whom are Dr. Charles Hull, of 
Cornell University; Dr. Frances Davenport, of the Department 
of Historical Research of the Carnegie Institute; Mr. Hubert 
Hall and Dr. Lilian Knowles, of the London School of Eco- 
nomics; Dr. A. F. Pollard, of University College, London, and 
especially Mr. George Louis Beer, who permitted the use of some 
of his extracts from the Colonial Papers. Thanks are due also to 
the officials of the Public Record Office, of the British Museum, 
of the House of Lords, of Devonshire House, of the Bodleian 
Library, of the Library of All Soul's College, Oxford, and of the 
Historical Society of Pennsylvania, who were unfailing in their 
courtesy and attention. 



Trade of the Delaware District Before the 

Revolution 



CHAPTER I 
Economic Conditions in the Delaware District Before 1763 

In treating the problems of the continental colonies it has been 
the custom, for the most part, to consider them as a whole, or to 
place special emphasis upon individual colonies. While this 
method may be used in political, social, or constitutional investi- 
gations, it is most inadequate when the subject of trade is under 
consideration. The thirteen colonies did not constitute an eco- 
nomic unit, and it is frequently difficult to consider any one colony 
by itself, because the area of trade and the political area did not 
always coincide. The export and import district of any given 
port depended largely upon the means of transportation, which, 
in the eighteenth century, usually meant river transportation. 
There were only a few roads stretching out from the main centers 
of population, and these were not capable of being used for heavy 
traffic. It was observed by an anonymous English writer that 
"North American productions are weighty and of great bulk, 
water carriage is extremely necessary to convey them to the sea- 
side for exportation and reconvey to the inland country the man- 
ufactures of Great Britain — a convenience without which such 
settlement can have little or no communication with the mother 
country, or be of much utility to it." 1 Thus, by using the means 
of transportation as a basis, the British-American mainland dur- 
ing the eighteenth century can be divided into trading districts. 
An economic study should concern itself with these districts 
rather than with individual colonies. 



Chatham Papers, Bun. 97, May, 1766. 
Friends' Collection of Mss. IV. 

Letters written from Philadelphia by Friends traveling in America in 
1757 describe the difficulties of travel over the few poor roads. 



242 Smith College Studies in History 

(1) Trade Boundaries 

The trade area of Philadelphia, one of the most flourishing 
ports on the American continent, included part of Pennsylvania, 
the three lower counties on the Delaware, and a large section of 
West Jersey. These formed, what, for convenience, might be 
called the Delaware district. In order to give the exact bound- 
aries of this district it would be necessary to ascertain to what 
market each farmer sent his produce and where he bought his 
supplies. The lack of material at present makes this impossible. 
Approximate boundaries only can be defined. Within the pro- 
vince of Pennsylvania the trade was usually confined to the 
counties of Philadelphia, Bucks, Berks, and Northampton, and 
the eastern and northern parts of Chester and Lancaster. This 
area was continually being extended by the opening of new roads, 
but serviceable roads were not numerous during the colonial per- 
iod. For example, the principal roads in 1776 connecting the 
upper Schuylkill and the Susquehannah were a road from 
Hughes' Saw-Mill, about thirty miles above Reading, to Fort Au- 
gusta, and the road running from Reading to a point just south of 
Fort Augusta. In the lower Susquehannah valley there were many 
more. The Paxton road began near the house of John Harris, 
Paxton Township, Lancaster County, and ran into the Highroad 
Kennison in Whiteland, Chester County. 2 The King's High- 
way and the New Castle and Conestoga Whiskey roads crossed 
the Nottingham and New Garden road near Elk Creek and 
reached Philadelphia by way of Kennett Square and Chester. 
There was also one from Harris Ferry (Harrisburg) to Lan- 
caster and another to Reading. 3 By means of these highways, 



2 Smith, William Roy, Sectionalism in Pennsylvania during the Revolu- 
tion [in The Political Science Quarterly, Vol. XXIV, No. 2; p. 219.] 
Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania, Vol. VIII, pp. 56-58. Pennsylvania 
Archives, 1st Series, Vol. IV, pp. 362-363. Colonial Records, Vol. IX, 
pp. 651, 182-185. 

'Colonial Records, Vol. Ill, pp. 419-420. Map of Nicholas Scull, 
(1759), and William Scull, (1770). [Pennsylvania Archives, 3rd Series, 
App. I-IX.] H. Frank Eshleman's Map of the Earliest Highways leading 
from the Deleware and Schuylkill Rivers to the Susquehannah River 
and its Branches. 



Trade: of the Delaware District 243 

traders, who had taken agricultural products to Philadelphia, or 
to Baltimore by boat or raft, could bring back manufactured ar- 
ticles from Philadelphia. 

It is very improbable that the product of the land west of the 
Susquehannah, or within a radius of a few miles east of the lower 
part of it, ever reached the eastern part of Pennsylvania. It was 
easier to take the produce of this section, put it on rafts and 
send it to Baltimore or Annapolis. There were three main rea- 
sons why the trade of Pennsylvania west of the district defined in 
the previous paragraph went to Baltimore. The first was lack of 
roads. Baltimore had grown up simultaneously with the rapid in- 
crease of the Scotch-Irish population in the western part of Penn- 
sylvania. It was a great surprise to the eastern merchants, who 
were accustomed to an undisputed monopoly of the commerce of 
Pennsylvania and surrounding colonies, when they first realized 
that this very lucrative western trade was going to a new port 
outside the province. All efforts made before the War of Inde- 
pendence to counteract this tendency were unsuccessful. 4 Mer- 
chants felt the loss of business keenly, but it was difficult to per- 
suade the assembly to appropriate the funds for building the 
necessary roads. 5 The second reason why the trade went to Mary- 
land may be found in the habits and occupations of the people, 
which made the Susquehannah the only necessary route. The set- 
tlers in that part of the province were agricultural. They pro- 
duced in the field or the house all the necessities of life. They 
had little need for the manufactured articles which were im- 
ported into the eastern part of the colony. In the third place, po- 
litical disaffection made them prefer to trade with Maryland. 
They took great delight in thwarting all the plans of the Quaker 
assembly to bring the western trade to Philadelphia. 

It is more difficult to draw the line in New Jersey beyond 
which the inhabitants ceased to trade with Philadelphia. There 



4 Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. IV, p. 362; IX, pp. 65, 657, 666, 703, 731. 
Lincoln, C. H., The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania, 1760- 
1776. Chap. IV, passim. 

"Ibid., p. 64. 



244 Smith College Studies in History 

was no port in that province which had a very extensive trade. 6 
Consequently, New Jersey depended upon the ports of New York 
and Philadelphia. The trade of East Jersey went to New York, 
but it was more convenient to send the products of West Jersey 
to Philadelphia by the Delaware river and its tributaries, or by 
road. 

The assumption that Philadelphia had a trade area which in- 
cluded West Jersey and the lower counties is further upheld by 
the divisions made for the vice-admiralty courts in America. 7 The 
staff of ofhcers stationed in Philadelphia had supervision over 
the ports of Pennsylvania, the lower counties, and West Jersey. 
Furthermore, the local commercial legislation proves conclusively 
that there existed a trade unity among all of the ports on the 
Delaware. 8 

Philadelphia was the only port within this district whose har- 
bors were of sufficient size to allow ships of more than eighty 
or ninety tons to enter. 9 A very good description was given of it 
in a report resulting from an investigation of the ports, districts 
and towns of America in 1770. "It has been taken for granted 
that the limits of this port begin where a line divides Pennsylvania 
from New Castle County and extends along the river Delaware 
on the Pennsylvania side as far as the river is navigable above 
Philadelphia — makes about twenty-five miles below and thirty 
miles above that city. Within this district are several creeks, but 
only navigable for small vessels, the principal are Chester, Darby 
and Sahykiir [Schuylkill?] 10 



6 Giesecke, American Commercial Legislation before 1789, pp. 103-104. 
New York had objected to Perth Amboy being made an important port. 
Osgood, H. L., The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, Vol. 
II, pp. 187-190. A discussion of Elizabethtown as a probable port may be 
found here. 

7 Admiralty Secretary Out Letters, 2 : 1058. Colonial Office, 391 :10. 
'W. T. Root, The Relations of Pennsylvania with Great Britain, p. 94. 

8 Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, 105, 384; III, 112, 151, 268, 
416. Acts regarding Tonnage Duties and Export and Import duties 
exempt Delaware and West Jersey. Giesecke, American Commercial 
Legislation Before 1789, p. 86. 

9 Pennsylvania Historical Society Memoirs, Vol. II, p. 216. Penn 
gave careful instructions concerning the location of the chief port in his 
commonwealth in view of future trade development. 

10 Additional Manuscripts, 15484, taken from Chalmers' Library. Ports, 
districts, and towns of America. 



Trade: of the Delaware District 245 

The other ports of the district — Lewes, New Castle, Wilming- 
ton and Burlington — played little part in any but the coastwise 
and contraband trade. Lewes extended thirty miles and included 
many small creeks. 11 Although admirably situated to serve as a 
base of operation for the prevention of illicit trade, it was really 
used as a convenient place to lie in wait for vessels, in order to 
smuggle cargoes into Philadelphia by taking them to Reedy Is- 
land, or some other place and unloading them. Conditions were 
much the same in the ports of Burlington, New Castle and Wil- 
mington as at Lewes. There was only one officer at Burlington, 
and it would have been impossible for him to supervise the num- 
erous creeks and river entries in that vicinity. 12 

It would be difficult to outline the local trade policy of this 
district with any degree of accuracy. There was such a small 
part of the trade which was not in some way influenced by the 
British laws, that the tendencies towards a definite provincial 
policy can only be estimated roughly. It is fairly clear, however, 
that free trade had gained as little headway here as in England. 
When the exemptions made in favour of West Jersey and Del- 
aware are eliminated, and the district is considered as a whole, 
there is very little which points to a free trade policy in the 
present use of the word. 13 Petitions of merchants against taxing 
trade, discussions in Council, and pamphlets written on the sub- 
ject, are the only indication of such a tendency. 14 

The primary reason for taxing trade was to secure revenue. 
The annual charge of maintaining and supporting the establish- 
ment of the province of Pennsylvania was estimated in 1767 
at £13,400. 15 This expense was met by various means. The as- 



u Additional Manuscripts, 15484, taken from Chalmers' Library. Ports, 
districts, and towns of America. 

12 Ibid. 

13 See Giesecke, American Commercial Legislation before 1789, passim. 
Pennsylvania Statutes, Vol. II, pp. 105 ; III, 151, 263, 363, 465. Pennsyl- 
vania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. II, p. 961. 

14 Colonial Records, Vol. VIII, pp. 30, 31. Pennsylvania Archives, 4th 
Series, Vol. II, p. 903. 

16 Pennsylvania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. Ill, p. 341, Papers of John 
Penn. 



246 Smith College: Studies in History 

sembly annually voted £1,200. 16 Fees such as licenses for public 
houses, marriages, pedlars and ships, and fines for offences of 
persons convicted were of uncertain but considerable value. 17 The 
sale of new lands brought in an increasing sum as the population 
grew. 18 A small amount was received from quit rents, but they 
were always in arrears, and so little care was taken in collecting 
them that not much was realized from this source. 19 In addition 
to the sum raised by these methods, it was thought necessary to 
tax exports and imports which were not subject to English trade 
laws. 

The first duties exacted were ad valorem. 20 This duty was 
usually 5%. It was soon supplanted by specific duties on certain 
articles, such as tobacco, sugar, cocoa, molasses, dye woods and 
tea ; other goods, except salt, iron and munitions of war retained 
the ad valorem duty of 5%. 

The early tariff legislation levying specific import duties on 
sugar, spirits, and wine, gave encouragement to direct trade from 
place of growth, to home shipping and to provincial production of 
spirits. 21 These bills, as well as those regarding tonnage during 
the first three decades, show clearly that the element of protec- 
tion was very strong. 22 In fact the eagerness to protect home 
shipping and industries was so great that the provincial tariff 
legislation interfered at times with the British. 23 Further indi- 
cations of a protective policy may be found in bounties offered 
for home production of certain products, and in the system of 
drawbacks on re-exportation. 24 



"Colonial Office, 5:112. 
11 Ibid. 

18 Pennsylvania Archives. 4th Series, Vol. Ill, 341-2. 

19 C. O., 5 :1233. 

10 Pennsylvania Archives. 2nd Series, Vol. V, 603. Colonial Records, 
Vol. Ill, p. 63. 

21 Pennsylvania Statutes, Vol. II, 105; III, 112, 151, 268, 416. James 
Madison, Letters and other writings (New York, 1899), Vol. I, 226. 

23 Pennsylvania Statutes, Vol. II, 385, 543 ; III, 166, 238. 
** Giesecke, p. 30. 

24 Pennsylvania Statutes, Vol. Ill, 115, 154. Votes and Proceedings of 
the House of Representatives, Vol. Ill, 6, 7, 128, 129, 314, 324. Pennsyl- 
vania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. I, 674, Papers of George Thomas. 



Trade of the Delaware District 247 

In two ways this district was more or less isolated from the 
mother country. It was principally controlled by the govern- 
ment of Pennsylvania. Since this government was proprietary 
in form, the deputy governor was appointed by the proprietor and 
was directly responsible to him. According to a statute of 1696, 
the appointment had to be approved by the crown and the 
deputy governor had to take an oath that he would perform his 
duties in regard to the trade laws. If the laws were not obeyed 
he was liable to a fine of £1,000, or removal from office. 25 Robert 
Quary, the first judge of the vice-admiralty in Philadelphia, made 
complaint against Deputy Governor Markham, who had not been 
approved, and finally forced William Penn in 1699 to remove 
him. 26 But that was about as far as any supervision of the deputy 
governors extended. Almost all the other colonial governors 
were required to send in detailed reports of the state of manu- 
factures and trade in their respective provinces. These were in 
answer to circular letters sent out by the board of trade. By 
mistake, one was sent to John Penn when he was deputy gov- 
ernor, and the correspondence which followed between Secretary 
Shelburne, Thomas Penn and John Penn shows clearly that the 
Penns considered their province as private property. Thus non- 
interference had allowed them to develop along independent 
lines. 27 

A second cause for isolation may be found in the undesirable 
economic character of the district considered from the mercantil- 
ist point of view. In the eighteenth century the ideal colony was 
one which produced raw material to be manufactured in the 
mother country, supplied food-stuffs which were not grown at 
home, or brought in bullion. In no way was this standard at- 
tained in the Delaware district. The products were virtually the 
same as those of England, so that instead of having an exchange- 
able commodity for British manufactures, the district was really 



25 Root, The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Government, 
1696-1765, p. 49. 

26 C. O., 5:1288, pp. 98 et seq. 

27 Penn Letter Book, Vol. IX, pp. 109, 241. Penn Manuscript, Vol. X, 
p. 192. C. O., 5:112, Letter from John Penn to Thomas Penn. 



248 Smith College Studies in History 

a competitor of Great Britain. This state of affairs hindered con- 
siderably any direct trade, such as existed between England and 
the southern colonies, or between England and the West Indies. 

(2) Products and Industries 

The Delaware district was primarily agricultural. The chief 
exports were provisions of various kinds and lumber. Of the 
provisions, the most important were wheat, flour and bread. 28 
From the time of the earliest settlements it was realized that 
wheat could be produced more easily than any other product, and 
flour milling and bread baking became thriving industries. But 
the desire to produce something which could be exchanged di- 
rectly with the mother-country led to experiments with other 
products, particularly tobacco, which yielded a large revenue to 
the government, and did not compete with the agricultural in- 
dustries of England. For these reasons the tobacco colonies held 
a favoured position in the English colonial system. 29 In 1701, 
William Penn, who was anxious to encourage tobacco and rice 
as staples and to promote the cod fisheries and fur trade, wrote to 
the board of trade that, if such industries were not developed, his 
colonies would not be at all useful to the mother country. 30 

For a time it seemed that tobacco would become the staple. 
The quality was very inferior to that produced in Virginia and 
Maryland, but it sold for a higher price, because there existed 
before the Act of Union a flourishing illegal trade between traders 
of this district and merchants in England who smuggled tobacco 
into Scotland. 31 "The great price which tobacco yields here," 
wrote Quary to the board of trade in 1700, "encourages the 
country to plant more than ever ; it hath been sold here this year 



28 C. O., 5:1280, Aug. 10, 1765. Letter from H. S. Conway to Governor 
Penn, in which he explains the competition between England and the 
Delaware district. 

29 C. O., 5:1289, pp. 2034. Little attention was paid to the fact that a 
great deal of the tobacco was re-exported to foreign countries, and that 
upon re-exportation all of the duties were drawn back. The main idea 
was to get the revenue regardless of subsequent drawbacks. 

30 C. O., 5:1288, pp. 227-234. C. O., 5:1289, pp. 17-31. 

3x Beer, G. L., Mss. notes based on Colonial Papers. 



Trade of the Delaware District 249 

for above thirty shillings per hogshead, which is more than the 
best Virginia and Maryland hath yielded, though the tobacco of 
this country is not half so good ; the reason is from the advantage 
of illegal trade here." 32 

In the same letter Quary said that Pennsylvania had determ- 
ined to plant tobacco in the three upper as well as in the three 
lower counties. 33 Before 1700, the amount produced was never 
more than 300 or 400 hogsheads, but in 1700 and 1701, it had in- 
creased to 3000 or 4000 hogsheads 34 and the production probably 
reached its height in 1705-1706, when John Evans, the deputy- 
governor, wrote that tobacco was of great importance to the peo- 
ple in general but especially to those of the lower counties. From 
this time there was a decrease in the production as is indicated 
by the custom house papers of Philadelphia, 1704-1713, which 
registered the amount of the penny a pound duty on exportation of 
tobacco from one colony to another. 35 The trade in tobacco was 
gradually superseded by trade in wheat, which was the more nat- 
ural product of the province. Sir William Keith wrote, in 1722, 
that it was more profitable to grow wheat than tobacco, owing to 
the trade which had grown up with the other ports on the Ameri- 
can continent, the West Indies and the southern ports of Europe. 36 

As early as 1700, Robert Quary said that the people by their 



32 C. O., 5:1288, pp. 18-19. 

33 C. O., 5:1288, pp. 227-234. 

34 C. O., 5:1288, pp. 26, 471. 

35 C. O., 5:1265, p. 114. 

C. O., 5 :390, June 1, 1724, Custom House, London. In 1722, there were 
137,721 pounds of tobacco exported from Pennsylvania to England. The 
amount was small compared with that sent from Virginia — 28,313,336 
pounds — and compared with the other exports from Pennsylvania. 

The Custom House Papers of Philadelphia 1704-1713. Duty of penny 
a pound on exportation of tobacco from Philadelphia. [This duty was 
1704-5 £825 18s. Id. levied on tobacco exported from colony to 
1705-6 973 13 10 colony by parliament in the act 25 Chas. 

II C 7 to ''prevent exportation of goods 
from colony to colony and so to foreign 
countries in Europe evading the English 
Customs." See Morriss — Colonial Trade 
of Maryland 1689-1715, p. 50 Col. S. P. A. 
W. I. 2306.] 
C. O., 5:1273, R 42. C. O., 5:1277, pp. 227-234. 



1706-7 


398 


11 


6 


1707-8 


615 








1708-9 


118 


14 


4 


1709-10 


214 


6 


2 


1710-11 


95 


11 


4 


1711-12 


209 


4 


4 



250 Smith Coi^egs Studies in History 

industry had greatly improved agriculture and had made bread 
and flour a drug on the market in the West Indies. 37 Colonel 
Thomas, in 1740, pointed out that the production of wheat was of 
great importance in that the proceeds of the large quantities which 
were exported from Philadelphia centered in Great Britain. 38 It 
was in time discovered, however, that the exportation of flour 
and bread was more profitable than that of wheat. In the latter 
part of the colonial period the trade statistics show that consider- 
able quantities of wheat were imported into Philadelphia from 
the other colonies, although very little was exported. At the same 
time there was a large exportation of bread and flour. 39 

Grist mills had existed in the district even before William 
Penn came to America. According to Bishop the first one was 
built on the Darby road, in 1643, by Colonel John Printz, the 
governor of New Sweden ; one was built in New Castle in 1658, 
and another at Trenton in 1680. Germantown possessed the first 
mill in Philadelphia County, but soon after the founding of 
Pennsylvania many mills were in operation throughout the dis- 
trict. The places where they were situated became markets for 
the grain of the surrounding country, and after the local demand 
was supplied the surplus was sent to Philadelphia for exporta- 
tion. The flour and bread industry gradually developed until in 
time it exceeded all others. The following table will give some 
idea of its increasing importance : 40 

Year Wheat (Bu.) Flour (Bbls.) Bread (Casks) 



1729 






74,809 


35,438 


9,730 


1730 






38,643 


38,570 


9,622 


1731 






53,320 


56,639 


12,436 


1752 








125,960 




1765 






365,522 


148,887 


34,736 


1772 






51,699 


252,744 


38,320 


1773 






92,012 


284,872 


50,504 


1774 






182,391 


265,967 


48,183 


The years 


1731-1738 mark the 
33. 


period when t 


he trade 


37 C. 0., 5:12 




38 Ibid. 












39 Colonial Customs 


(Record Office) 


i 16:1. 




40 Bishop, J. 


L., 


American Manufactures, 139-144. 





Trade of the Delaware District 251 

and bread became noticeably more important. They were years 
of unusual harvests both in Europe and America. This worked 
a great hardship upon the wheat exporting provinces. It brought 
about a stagnation of currency in Pennsylvania, and threatened 
her prosperity. Governor Gordon, in his address to the assem- 
bly in 1731, pointed out that "all possible measures should be 
taken to recommend them to a greater degree abroad that they may 
find a readier sale." 41 He remarked further, "I have understood 
that, when this colony was young and had but little experience, it 
exceeded all its neighbors in the fineness of its flour and bread 
and goodness of its beer, which are the only produce of our grain ; 
the first two have greatly contributed to their improvement as 
well as the reputation of the province. And it will still become 
the legislature to continue their care and concern in a point of 
such consequence to the whole." 42 

As the above indicates care was taken that the flour and 
bread which was exported should attain a high standard. It was 
enacted in 1700, "that all biscuits and flour made for transporta- 
tion shall be well made and honestly and truly packed for the 
encouragement of our trade and credit : that those who purchase 
the same may not be cheated or defrauded. And all such persons 
that make flour or biscuits for transportation shall set their sev- 
eral brand marks on each cask before shipped, on the penalty of 
five shillings for every cask by them sold and unmarked as afore- 
said. And if any bread or flour shall pass out of this province 
or territories falsely packed and the same happen to be returned, 
in all such cases the persons offending shall pay to the party 
wronged double damages for the same." 43 

From time to time this act was renewed and additions were 
made to it. Each addition was more stringent, and was usually 
passed on the advice of the governor when he noticed a tendency 



41 Pennsylvania Archives, 4th Series, Vol. I, 474. 

42 Ibid. 

43 Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, 96. 



252 Smith Coixegs Studies in History 

for the quality to deteriorate. 44 For example, Governor Gordon 
in addressing the assembly, on November 2, 1738, said : "The 
better your commodities exported from hence are, the better price 
they will fetch at markets abroad. Care too ought to be taken 
that the exporter is not deceived. . . . This consideration ap- 
plied to your flour trade will induce you to take some further 
care of it; for though the laws you already have will be of great 
service if well executed, some further regulations seem necessary, 
particularly to prevent the mixture of different sorts of grain, 
which every man sees are now reaped in every field." 45 

Similar care was taken in the preparation of other provisions 
which were exported from Philadelphia. 46 There was a flourish- 
ing export trade in cattle, and the packing of beef and pork to be 
used in the West Indies was very important. Hence we find num- 
erous laws passed, demanding that these provisions be made mer- 
chantable and inflicting severe penalties on those who evaded 
them. Laws of this nature were very easily evaded, and were 
probably less effective than the force of competition. 

Not a little profit was realized in the fur trade. The beaver 
trade was important in the Schuylkill valley before William Penn 
came, and skins of all kinds in fairly large quantities were ex- 
ported from Philadelphia during the entire colonial period. In 
the opening years of the eighteenth century they formed with to- 
bacco the chief articles of export. From Christmas, 1699, to Christ- 
mas 1700 the following were sent: 516 pounds of buck in hair, 
326 pounds of cat, 1222 pounds of fox, 121 beaver skins, 4921 
pounds of raccoon, together with some elk, bear and mink. 47 The 
table of exports from Philadelphia show that there were : 



44 These renewals and additions were made on : May 22, 1722, Penn- 
sylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. Ill, 321; August 18, 1727, Ibid., Vol. 

IV, 73; January 19, 1733, Ibid., Vol. IV, 248; March 9, 1745, Ibid., Vol. 

V, 38; April 21, 1759, Ibid., Vol. V, 400; April 22, 1761, Ibid., Vol. VI, 
112; February 21, 1767, Ibid., Vol. VII, 57. 

45 Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of Pennsyl- 
vania, Vol. Ill, 324. 

46 Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, 96; III, 22, 275; IV, 75; 
V, 97, 400. 

47 Bean, T. W., History of Montgomery County, p. 120. C. O., 5 :1291, 
pp. 226-227. 



Trade of the Delaware District 253 

49 chests of skins in 1759 

140 chests of skins in 1760 

256 chests of skins in 1761 

228^ chests of skins in 1762 

132 chests of skins in 1763 48 

Before 1759, the Indian trade in Pennsylvania, where the 
traders were very numerous and enterprising, 49 was practically 
unrestricted. Any one could engage in it upon obtaining a li- 
cense from the governor. 50 After that time regulations were 
made because of the increasing difficulties with the Indians. This 
trade was" considered of such importance that in 1766 the estab- 
lishment of a colony in the Illinois country was strongly urged. 51 
Philadelphia was to be one of the chief places for importing Brit- 
ish manufactures for the numerous Indian tribes which lived near 
the lakes and the different branches of the Mississippi. 

Timber as a product for exportation, was almost as import- 
ant as grain and meat. There was an abundance in Pennsylvania, 
the lower counties, and West Jersey. The existence of several 
saw mills in the seventeenth century shows that the industry had 
developed from the first. 52 They became numerous along the 
many rivers and creeks, which were a great advantage, in that 
they furnished water power to run the mills, as well as the means 
of transporting logs to the mills and lumber to Philadelphia. 

Hickory and oak were made into barrels, hogsheads, and 
staves ; and walnut was considered valuable material for furni- 



48 Custom House Papers in the Library of the Historical Society of 
Pennsylvania. 

49 Hanna, C. A., The Trail in the Wilderness, Vol. I, p. 6, taken from 
the writings of George Croghan. 

50 Ibid., Vol. II, p. 325. A full discussion of the fur trade may be found 
in this book, in which are reprinted extracts from the Journals of George 
Croghan who was called "The king of the traders." 

Giesecke, p. 53. Skins and furs were the only commodities upon which 
export duties were imposed in Pennsylvania. 

Laws of Pennsylvania, 1682-1700, p. 138. 

Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd Series, Vol. II, pp. 619-627, for names of 
Indian Traders in Pennsylvania, 1743-1776. 

61 C. O., 5 :67, Reasons for Establishing a British Colony at the Illinois 
with some proposals thereon. 

52 Bishop, American Manufactures, Vol. I, pp. 109-112. 



254 Smith Coli^ge; Studies in History 

ture. 53 Unfortunately this lumber, with the exception of that 
grown in West Jersey, could not be used as a naval store for 
Great Britain. The surveyor-general in his report on naval sup- 
plies ignored this district because the quality of its timber was 
so very inferior to that grown in the southern provinces and New 
England. 54 Consequently, little benefit was received from the 
bounty which Great Britain offered on masts imported from the 
colonies. 

There seems to be no reason why hemp, which was another 
valuable naval store, should not have been grown in abundance. 
In Great Britain, where there was a great demand for it, it could 
be produced only at a high cost. Joshua Gee wrote to the board 
of trade, in 1717, that the bounty on hemp should be continued 
for twenty years. 55 His advice was taken, but the increase in the 
crop in no way justified its continuation. 56 Again, in 1731, Gov- 
ernor Gordon recommended the raising of hemp, because of the 
lack of products suitable for exportation to Great Britain. 57 Be- 
sides the encouragement of the mother country in the way of 
bounties, the provincial government of Pennsylvania offered 
premiums on good and merchantable hemp. An act was passed in 
1722, which offered a bounty of one penny per pound on hemp 
fit for exportation. 58 This act was continued from time to time 
until 1731, when it was repealed. 59 The law was much abused, 
since it was very difficult to detect and punish those who brought 
in bad hemp for exportation. Furthermore, it was not considered 
worth while to continue such encouragement when so little was 
produced. The high price of labor was probably responsible for 
the failure of this project. 60 

One of the most important industries was that of ship build- 



53 Colonial Office, 5:1233. 

54 Admiralty Secretary, I, 4127. 
50 C. O., 5:1265, p. 114. 

56 C. O., 5:1266, p. 42. 

57 Ibid. 

58 Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. Ill, p. 314. 
69 Ibid., IV, pp. 231-2. 

60 C. O., 5:1268, S. 44. 



Trade of the: Delaware District 255 

ing. 61 Salem and Burlington were the first to build vessels, but 
they were soon surpassed by Philadelphia which was a recog- 
nized center of this industry in 1700. Many vessels built in Sa- 
lem, Burlington, Newcastle and Wilmington were brought to 
Philadelphia for registration. The coastwise and West Indian 
trade offered great encouragement to ship building. Almost all 
of this trade employed home shipping. Provincial ships were 
also used in the wine trade. Out of six vessels importing Ma- 
deira wine, in 1719-20, two were built and registered in Philadel- 
phia. 62 It was considered very important to use vessels built in 
the district, because they were exempt from the tonnage duties 
which were imposed on other colonial ships. 63 

Various forces were at work which retarded the development 
of this industry in all of the continental colonies. British mer- 
chants and traders, who were interested in ship building at home, 
looked with increasing alarm upon the development of it in the 
colonies. As long as the colonists supplied themselves only with 
coasting vessels, those used in the fisheries, or larger ones which 
were made to convey timber, they were not considered as danger- 
ous competitors. But when they began to build ships which riv- 
alled those made in Great Britain, the merchants complained and 
urged Parliament through petitions to discourage colonial ship- 
building. 64 Although there was no direct legislation on this sub- 
ject it is quite evident that the industry did not fulfill its early 
promise. While Richard Penn said in 1774 that ships of three 
hundred or four hundred tons were built very expeditiously in 
Pennsylvania, 65 the development of ship building had not kept 



"Ibid., C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. 
52 C. O., 5:1266, R. 18. 

63 Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, p. 384; III, 165; V. 353; 
VIII, 42. 

64 Chalmers, Revolt of the Colonies, Vol. I, pp. 387, 388. 

85 House of Lords Manuscript. Examination of Richard Penn before 
the House of Lords. 



256 Smith College: Studies in History 

pace with the advancement of trade and the increase of popu- 
lation. 66 

In New England, ship building was closely connected with the 
fishing industry. This was partially responsible for her superior- 
ity in the former. In the Delaware district, fisheries never be- 
came important. It is true that the first boats and vessels built on 
the Delaware were used in the fishing trade ; 67 and William Penn 
expressed a hope, in 1701, that the whale fisheries would be 
developed, so that returns could be made to England in whale 
oil and whale bone. 68 Furthermore, Cape May and Burling- 
ton counties were supposed to have a flourishing fishing 
trade. Governor Cox mentions the products of the former county 
as consisting of whale bone and whale oil. Nevertheless, com- 
pared with other districts, the importance of fisheries was negli- 
gible. It was said that Pennsylvania was allowed to import salt 
free of duty from southern Europe for a fishery that never ex- 
isted. 69 This was scarcely true because there were many acts 
passed by the provincial assembly of Pennsylvania for the devel- 
opment of fisheries in the Delaware, Susquehannah, and Lehigh 



66 The following table indicates the relative increase of population, 
shipbuilding and trade with England. 

Approximate Years No. Ships Ton'ge Exports to Exports from 

Population Built in Pa. England England 

40,000* .... 1722 10 458 £4,499 0s. Od.s i22,505 0s. OdA 

1723 13 507 8,332 15,993 19 A? 

1724 19 9595 4,057 0* 30,324 
250,000^ .... 1769 22 1,469 26,111 3 7 199,909 17 11 

1770 16 2,354 28,104 5 11 134,881 

1771 21 1,3074 31,615 19 9« 728,744 0<* 
*C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. 

2 Rossiter, W., A Century of Population, p. 6. 

3 Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of Pennsyl- 
vania, Vol. Ill, p. 9. 

4 Macpherson, D., Annals of Commerce, Vol. Ill, p. 570. 

5 B. T. Commercial Series, Vol. 414. 

6 H. of L. Mss., Table of Exports and Imports to England from North 
American Colonies. 

7 Pitkins, T., Commerce, p. 15. 

* De Bow, J. D. B., The Industrial Review, Vol. I, p. 313. 

67 Bishop, American Manufacturers, Vol. I, p. 69. 

68 C. O., 5:1289, pp. 203-4. 

69 Chalmers' Revolt of the Colonies, Vol. I, p. 452. 



Trade of the Delaware District 257 

rivers. 70 The river fisheries no doubt contributed to the export 
trade of Philadelphia, but the amount was probably much less 
than that imported from New England and Nova Scotia for re- 
exportation. 

It was recognized in the beginning of the century that iron ore 
existed in great abundance in Pennsylvania. Joshua Gee wrote 
to the board of trade, in 1717, that it would be wise to offer a 
bounty of £3 on bar iron and £1 10s. on cast iron. 71 He made a 
further suggestion that " it will be necessary to lay a duty on 
iron and hemp consumed in that country, that England may not 
be deprived of the trade they derive from those commodities man- 
ufactured and sent to the plantations." 72 In the same year Sir 
William Keith wrote to the board of trade that he had found in 
Pennsylvania a great deal of iron ore, which was worked up to 
such an extent that the importation of iron from Great Britain was 
discouraged. He sent several samples of this ore to the merchants 
in London with a description of the places where it was found. 73 
Keith no doubt overestimated the possibilities of manufacturing 
iron in the province. Several years later Gordon wrote to the 
board of trade that iron furnaces had been set up, but that they 
had been used only two years. 74 The high price of labor made 
it impossible for them to compete successfully with the Swedish 
trade in manufactured iron. 75 

The board of trade had been persuaded at an early date that 
a bounty on iron would be beneficial. The difficulty lay in ob- 
taining the necessary parliamentary legislation. Finally an act 
was passed, in 1750, repealing the duties on iron bars, which were 
imported into London, and on pig iron, which was imported into 
the out-ports. 76 At the same time, it was forbidden to erect mills 



70 Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. VIII, p. 467. 
71 C. O., 5:1265, S. 114. 



72 C. O., 5:1266, S. 114, 140. 

73 C. O., 5:1268, S. 34. 
''Ibid., S. 44. 

75 Chatham Papers, Bun. 97. Reasons for Allowing the Importation of 
Bar Iron from America. 
™23 Geo. II, c. 29. 



258 Smith Coixsge Studies in History 

in the colonies for the making of steel. There were in Pennsyl- 
vania and Delaware the following plants : 

1. A mill or engine for slitting and rolling iron in Thornbury 
township, Chester County. 

2. A pleating forge to work with a tilt-hammer in Byberry 
township, Philadelphia County. This had not been used for nine 
months. 

3. Two furnaces for making steel in Pennsylvania, both of 
which were in Philadelphia. 77 

From this it would seem that the manufacturing of iron and 
steel was not done on a large scale. It has been suggested that it 
was "merely an accessory to the ship building industry, which de- 
manded that certain parts should be made of iron and fitted into 
the ship. On account of this, these parts could not be imported 
from Europe because an exact fit was required." 78 

The act of 1750 does not seem to have given the desired stim- 
ulus. Of the ten forges existing in 1756 all but two or three had 
been erected before the act was passed. 79 The output of these did 
not show the increase that might have been expected from such a 
measure. From the account of William Denny, the deputy gov- 
ernor, in 1756, it can be seen that the output of eight forges was 
as follows during the years 1749-1756 : 80 

Total Tons 1st Year Average 
Tons Tons 

1. Pine Forge 747 103 124 

2. Poot Forge 1749-1754 313 73 78 

3. Glaseow 1750-1756 595 108 119 

4. Pottsgrove 1755-1756 64 

5. Coventry 1749-1756 339 45 48 

6. Windsor 1749-1756 495 90 S2y 2 

7. Helenshed 1749-1756 480 59 69 

8. Minor Forge 1751-1756 342 45 57 

The wool act 81 of 1699 brought as little hardship upon the 

77 C. O., 5:1273. 

78 Beer, G. L., Mss. notes based on Colonial Office Papers. 

79 Swank, T. W., Iron in All Ages, p. 113. Mantauney Creek Furnace 
was erected in 1716; Coventry in 1720; and Cornwall and Warwick in 
1740. It is also stated that in 1740 many furnaces and other iron works 
existed in New Jersey. 

80 C. O., 5:1275, W. 25. 

81 Statutes of the Realm, 1699. 10-11 William III, c. 10. 



Trade: of the Delaware District 259 

colonies as the iron act. It was primarily intended to affect Ire- 
land, but the colonies were included, through the fear that in the 
future the colonists might take to manufacturing their own wool. 
Conditions at that time did not favour the production of wool 
and there was no intercolonial trade in this commodity. More- 
over, the wording of the statute gives no indication that it was 
desired to discourage the production of wool or the spinning or 
weaving of it in the various households. It merely prohibited the 
exportation of the raw or manufactured material from one colony 
to another. William Penn criticised the act on the grounds that 
it was geographically impossible for it to be executed. 82 It often 
happened that a man living near the boundary of one colony, let 
us say Pennsylvania, found it to his advantage to sell the wool or 
yarn produced on his farm to his neighbors in Maryland in ex- 
change for tobacco and rice. As this possibility must have oc- 
curred to those who framed the act, it is hardly possible that they 
considered such instances of any importance. 

There was little danger of this act being disobeyed in Penn- 
sylvania, the lower counties and West Jersey. Sheep were raised 
and domestic manufacturing was carried on, but there were no 
serious attempts to establish the business on a commercial basis. 
This was due partly to the high cost of labor and partly to the 
fact that it was fashionable to wear English clothing. 

The distillation of sugar and grain was a very profitable in- 
dustry. In exchange for the lumber and provisions sent to the 
West Indies, large quantities of sugar, molasses and rum were 
brought back to Philadelphia. Although the rum that was made 
in the West Indies, particularly in Jamaica, was superior to all, 
there was considerable competition in its production in the conti- 
nental colonies. Distilleries were multiplied as fast as saw mills 
and grist mills, and formed with them the basis of the export 
trade of Philadelphia. 

There were two classes of manufactories within this district 
before 1765. Grist mills, saw mills, distilleries, shipbuilding and 
iron works belonged to the first. The British government never in- 



C. O., 5 :1289, p. 25. 



260 Smith Cou^ge Studies in History 

terfered with the first three of these, and its influence upon the 
others is doubtful. For the most part they were left free to de- 
velop as much as the demand for their products allowed. The 
second class included all household manufactures. They were 
numerous and developed quite naturally in connection with farm 
life. There are conflicting statements concerning the extent to 
which this system prevailed. Coloniel William Hart said that the 
inhabitants wore the same clothing and had the same utensils as 
were used in Great Britain. 83 Sir William Keith claimed that the 
necessary clothing came from Great Britain and was paid for by 
means of the export trade in wheat to the West Indies. 84 These 
reports were probably the result of observations made in Phil- 
adelphia or other towns where British goods were in great de- 
mand. Governor Gordon states clearly that the farmers made 
clothing of the coarser sort for themselves and that the Irish and 
German settlers sold linen of their own making to their neigh- 
bors. 85 It is quite evident, however, that the only reason why 
manufactures of the second class existed may be found in the 
colonists' inability to pay for British goods. 

(3) Trade Routes 

As the people of the Delaware district became more prosper- 
ous their demand for European goods steadily increased, but as 
their own products were unsuitable for direct exchange with 
Great Britain, they were compelled to develop circuitous routes 
of trade. By this means the desired manufactures were pur- 
chased and large profits were realized on a carrying trade, which 
made Philadelphia of considerable importance as an entreport on 
the American continent. The great mass of colonial regulations 
made Philadelphia of considerable importance as an entrepot on 
trading with certain parts of the world. In spite of these restric- 
tions, however, many profitable channels of trade were discovered. 
In order to understand fully the vast net work of the commerce of 



83 C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. 
8i Ibid., R. 42. 
85 Ibid., S. 15. 



Trade; of the: Delaware; District 261 

this district in the middle of the eighteenth century every route 
should be traced, and if possible vessels taking very circuitous 
routes should be followed closely. Space will not permit such a 
detailed account, but an examination of the tables of exports and 
imports will indicate partially the extent of the Delaware com- 
merce, and its dependence upon non-British trade for its economic 
justification as a unit of the empire. 86 

The chief routes from Philadelphia were those going to the 
other colonial ports, the West Indies, the Wine Islands, Southern 
Europe and the British Isles. There was scarcely a port in the 
continental colonies, with which this district did not have com- 
mercial relations. The numerous harbors, rivers, creeks and 
bays along the coast offered many opportunities for trade. In the 
amount of tonnage employed and as a means for gaining re- 
mittances to Great Britain these routes were very significant. 
From the southern ports various commodities were imported, 
both for home consumption and for re-exportation, such as rice, 
tobacco, tar, pitch, turpentine, Indian corn, wheat, rye and deer 
skins. For these the following were sent in exchange : bread and 
flour made within the district; sugar imported from the West 
Indies ; rum and molasses of West Indian, New England, or home 
production ; and goods of various sorts imported from the conti- 
nent of Europe. Although the southern ports enjoyed a profit- 
able direct trade with Great Britain by which they were able 
to import European manufactures, nevertheless they import- 
ed a considerable amount of European goods through Philadel- 
phia. 87 

The trade with Maryland and New York was not at all large. 
Maryland imported agricultural products from Western Pennsyl- 
vania by way of the Susquehannah. Her exports were very sim- 



86 See Appendix II. 

87 C. O., 5 :1499, Shipping Returns of Virginia. 

Treasury Board Papers, 461, Shipping Returns of Virginia. 
C. O., 5:511, Shipping Returns of North Carolina. 
C. O., 5:1228, Shipping Returns of South Carolina. 
C. O., 5 :710, Shipping Returns of Georgia. 
C. O., 5 :573, Shipping Returns of Florida. 



262 Smith Coli^ge Studies in History 

ilar to those of the colonies south of her, which, as we have seen, 
sent their produce to Philadelphia. The intense jealousy existing 
between Pennsylvania and Maryland caused their relations to be 
almost negligible. With New York there was a close competition 
in the exportation of agricultural products and lumber. 88 A few 
exchanges were made in bread, flour and European goods, but the 
shipping returns show that very few vessels were cleared annually 
from Philadelphia to New York. 

The fisheries and peltries were the main features of the import 
trade from New England 89 and Nova Scotia. 90 The prepara- 
tion of fish for exportation was a thriving industry in both places, 
and consequently salt was in great 'demand. Since salt could be 
imported into Philadelphia free of duty, it was profitable to ex- 
change salt for prepared fish. 91 Some flour, bread and locally 
manufactured articles, such as rum, cabinet ware and soap, were 
also sent to New England and Nova Scotia. 

The West Indian trade was the most important of all, being in 
fact the basis of the commercial life of this district. 92 The in- 
habitants of these islands were almost exclusively engaged in pro- 
ducing sugar, rum, and molasses, together with a little coffee, 
cocoa and cotton. 93 They demanded, in return for these products, 
provisions of all kinds and lumber in large quantities to be used 
in making barrels, hogsheads, and casks. Naturally England 
wished to supply the need, since she had provisions for exporta- 
tion and desired above all to import raw materials ; but the con- 
tinental colonies were geographically in a better position to meet 
the demand. Hence, in spite of the close competition with the 



88 C. O., 5:1228, Shipping Returns of New York. 

89 C. O., 5 :851, Shipping Returns of New England. 

90 C. O., 5 :221, Shipping Returns of Nova Scotia. 

91 C. O., 5 :851, Shipping Returns of New England. 

100,000 hhds. of salt were sent to Boston from Philadelphia in one 
quarter. 

92 Admiralty, 592. 

C. O., 142:19, Shipping Returns of the West Indies. 
C. O., 76:4, Shipping Returns of the West Indies. 
C. O., 33 :17, Shipping Returns of the West Indies. 
Pipe Office, Declared Accounts— Customs, Roll 1265. 

93 Customs, 16:1. 



Trade: of the: Delaware: District 263 

mother-country, the Delaware district, whose lumber was par- 
ticularly adapted to West Indian uses, controlled a great part of 
the trade. 

Of the British West Indies, Jamaica furnished the best market 
for bread, flour, meat, fish, timber and soap. 94 Joshua Gee, in 
discussing the importance of Jamaica to the Pennsylvania trade, 
said, "The Spanish West Indies are reached by way of this island 
where corn and provisions are sent. ... If this trade be 
properly nursed up, it may draw the Spanish coast very much to 
depend on us for a supply of flower, biskets, etc." The imports 
from Jamaica were not heavy. Many vessels were sent back to 
Philadelphia in ballast, while some went in ballast to other is- 
lands, chiefly for sugar, rum and molasses. 

The Leeward Islands supplemented the trade with Jamaica. 95 
These islands, especially Dominica, were rich in cocoa and coffee, 
besides producing sugar and some cotton. Great Britain in her 
direct trade with them could supply the necessary amount of food- 
stuffs, and, consequently, it was difficult for the Delaware traders 
to make a favorable exchange of products. A demand for lum- 
ber, however, gave them a foothold and, in time, they began to 
compete with the mother-country in supplying food stuffs, but, 
even when the trade was unfavorable, products of these islands 
were considered of such importance that it was worth while for 
the traders to sell their goods in Jamaica and then to sail in ballast 
to the Leeward Islands for a return cargo. Attempts to trade 
with Barbadoes, Granada, the Grenadines and Tobago met with 
greater competition. 96 These had always been Great Britain's 
prize sugar colonies, with whom she carried on a flourishing trade. 
The shipping returns indicate that few products were imported 
directly from the American mainland, although many undoubt- 
edly came through the neighboring islands. 

Extensive and profitable as the West Indian trade was, it was 
not sufficient to dispose of all of the surplus agricultural products 



94 C. O., 142:19, Shipping Returns of Jamaica. 

95 C. O., 76 :4, Shipping Returns of the Leeward Islands. 

96 C. O., 33:17, Shipping Returns of the Windward Islands. 



264 Smith Coixkge Studies in History 

and lumber. A demand for American grain, during the years of 
scarcity in Europe had opened a trade with the southern ports of 
that continent. The wine trade with Madeira and the Azores 
had been carried on from an early date, and since these islands 
were en route to southern Europe this channel became very im- 
portant. Grain was the basis of the trade, but there was also a 
market for other products. It was reported, in 1720, that Penn- 
sylvania traded with Lisbon, Cadiz and Alicante, sending pipe 
staves, planks, timber and also fish which had been purchased 
from New England. 97 Some vessels returned to the Isle of May 
and loaded salt, others went to the Madeiras for wine, which 
they sold in the West Indies. The usual course was to take goods 
which could be sold in Great Britain, or cash for products, and 
return by way of England to purchase manufactures. In the early 
part of the eighteenth century this trade was only casual, since it 
depended upon the scarcity of grain in Europe. Deputy Gov- 
ernor Gordon said, in 1731, that, in consequence of the recent 
poor harvests in Europe, Pennsylvania had shipped 40,000 bushels 
of grain to Europe — Ireland, Lisbon and the Straits — , "but when 
there are plentifull crops we ship little or none." 98 In another 
connection he said that the demand for flour and bread was un- 
certain, as it depended on the crops in other countries. Later the 
demand became more regular. The deficit created by the long 
wars in Europe, which America was called upon to meet, and 
the years of poor harvests after 1757 put the trade on a firmer 
foundation. 99 

The wine trade was significant in itself, apart from its con- 
nection with the trade to southern Europe. Provisions and lum- 
ber were sent to the Wine Islands and exchanged for wines, and 
bills of remittances. It was estimated, in 1731, that from 15,000 



97 C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. 

98 C. O., 5:1268, S. 34. 

99 Adm. Papers, II, 3837. 

A letter from the British Consul, April 10, 1767, in which it is stated 
that a vessel from Philadelphia was at Leghorn. This is one of many 
indications that the traders of the Delaware district traded with southern 
riurope. 



Trade of the: Delaware District 265 

to 20,000 bushels of wheat, some Indian corn, and some bread 
were annually exported to the Madeiras. 100 Wine from these is- 
lands had been for a long time a favorite drink in England, and, 
as its importation into the colonies grew, it enjoyed the same 
reputation there. Furthermore, since Madeira wine was allowed 
to be imported directly from the place of growth, there were 
heavy imports, much of which was re-exported. In some in- 
stances, the traders took the wine directly to the West Indies, 
where it found a ready market. 101 

Thus, by means of the trade with other American ports, the 
British and foreign West Indies, the southern European countries 
and the wine islands, the traders of the Delaware district man- 
aged to dispose of the surplus agricultural products and to sup- 
ply themselves with articles which could be sold in Great Britain, 
or with cash to pay for European manufactures. In the early 
days of the eighteenth century, when tobacco was grown in the 
district, there had been a profitable direct trade with Great Brit- 
ain, but even at that time part of the cargoes sent from Philadel- 
phia consisted of goods which had been imported previously from 
other places. A report of the inspector-general, Charles Dave- 
nant, dated March 21, 1707, illustrates this point. It gives an 
account of goods imported into England from Pennsylvania, and 
the duties thereon, from Christmas, 1698, to Christmas, 1705. 102 
The total amount of duties paid was £36,598, or an average of 
£5,227 annually. Of this sum tobacco contributed about 90%, or 
£32,419. In addition to the tobacco, 226 tons of logwood were 
imported, paying £1,074 duty. The other articles imported were 

100 C. O., 5:1266, S. 34. 

101 C. O., 5:1265, S. 176. Imports into Pennsylvania of Madeira and 
western island wine from Christmas, 1715 to Christmas, 1718: 

Pipes Hhds. Casks 

Madeira wine 655 9 18 

Fayel wine 83 2 

Passado wine 3 

Vinegar 3 

C. O., 5:1266, R. 18. During the year from Christmas, 1719, to Christ- 
mas, 1720, there were imported in six vessels, 270 pipes, 7 hhds, and 7 
quarter casks. 

102 C. O., 5:1263, Q. 99. 



266 Smith College: Studies in History 

drugs, ginger, rice, sugar, indigo and molasses in small quantities, 
and a great number of skins of all kinds. Of these commodities 
only tobacco and skins were native products, the others being the 
result of trade with other ports, especially those of the West 
Indies. As tobacco ceased to be cultivated and bread and flour 
became the staple products, the exports to Great Britain con- 
sisted more and more of commodities which had been previously 
imported. 103 A comparison of a list of goods exported to Lon- 
don in 1765 with an account of goods and merchandise imported 
into England from Pennsylvania, Christmas, 1699, to Christmas, 
1700, shows to what extent re-exportation had increased. 104 

Even with the great increase of re-exported goods to Great 
Britain before 1763, the excess of imports over exports became 
greater each year. In 1700, the exports almost equaled the im- 
ports, but, in 1763, they were only 13% of the imports. 105 This 
indicates that the amount of remittances paid down was very large 
or that the Delaware merchants were continually the debtors of 
the British. The latter supposition is substantiated by a report 
which was made in 1791, giving an account of the debts, together 
with the interest thereon, due to the British merchants before 
1776. According to this statement Pennsylvania owed £229,- 
452 4s. 4d. 10Q 

It is impossible to estimate with any degree of accuracy the 
value of the legal trade of this district in all of its channels. The 
early accounts are all more or less vague. Colonel William Hart 
in 1720 said that the annual produce of Pennsylvania, including 
the home trade, was £100,000, and that the annual consumption 
of British manufactures was valued between £50,000 and £60,000. 
More accurate estimates can be made for the later years because 
greater demands were made upon the customs officers to send in 
carefully prepared shipping returns. The exports to England 



103 C. O., 5:1268, S. 44. 

104 Appendices I, II. 

105 
106 



Appendix IV. 

Chatham Papers, Bundle 343, The sum Total of the Debts due by the 
respective American States to the Merchants and Traders of Great Britain 
previous to the year 1776 with interest on the same. 



Trade: of the: Delaware; District 267 

alone in 1763 amounted to £38,228 10s. 2d. and the imports from 
England to £284,152 16s. Id. 107 

(4) Illicit Trade Before 1763 

On account of the enormous amount of smuggling during the 
eighteenth century, it would be incorrect to rely upon the shipping 
returns of the customs for an accurate account of trade. This 
practice existed throughout the empire, but there was no place 
where it prevailed with more impunity than at times in the Dela- 
ware district. The physical features of the river and bay gave 
many opportunities for evading the navigation laws. 108 In the 
investigation over the boundary line between Pennsylvania and 
Maryland this fact was pointed out. A pilot who had served for 
thirty years said that there were on the east side of the bay 
"harbours fit for trade and shipping, viz., Morris's River and Co- 
hansic Creek. And on the east side of Delaware River, Salem 
Creek, Timber Creek and Ankokus Creek — and that there is on 
the west side of the said bay Prince Book Bay and on the west 
side of the said river St. George's Creek, Christian Creek, Derby 
Creek, and Schuykill River." 109 

Besides the difficulties attending the long coast line made by 
numerous rivers and creeks, there were a few islands, between 
the provinces of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, which were not 
included in the bounds of the grants of either province. Petitions 
to the governors of these provinces indicate that they often served 
as places of refuge for unprincipled men, committing offences in 
the neighbouring provinces, as well as suitable places for contra- 
band goods. 110 

From the beginning of the history of the colony traders evaded 
the navigation laws. In 1699 the board of trade, acting on the 
advice of Robert Quary, brought serious charges of smuggling 



107 See Appendix, IV. 

108 Addit. Mss. 15484, Ports, Districts and Towns of America, 1770. In 
the discussion of the trade boundaries the lack of supervision was noted. 

109 Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd Series, Vol. XVI, p. 747. 

110 Domestic Entry Book, 140. 



Col. S. P. Domestic Home Office Papers. 



268 Smith College: Studies in History 

against Penn's colony. 111 They demanded the repeal of the law 
passed in 1699 which made all breaches of trade laws cognizable 
in their common law courts of record, that Colonel William 
Markham be removed from the office of lieutenant governor, that 
closer obedience be given to the admiralty courts and greater en- 
couragement offered to the officer of the customs, and that piracy 
be suppressed. 112 Penn decided to go out to the colony and to 
take charge of the government himself. His presence at first 
gave great satisfaction. He procured the enactment of a law 
forbidding trade to Madagascar or Natal, the chief centers of 
piratical trade, 113 and another law, obliging the king's officers to 
weigh all tobacco casks before shipment, in order to do away 
with frauds in the penny a pound duty. 114 

The trouble was settled for a short time only. Quary accused 
Penn of encroaching upon the admiralty jurisdiction, and said 
that illegal trade continued. 115 For this reason, the board of 
trade recommended in March, 1701, that the proprietary provinces 
should be placed on the same level of dependency as the other 
colonies, 116 without prejudice to the property rights, and in the 
same year a bill to that effect was introduced and considered in 
the house of lords. 117 Penn answered these charges in several 
despatches. On December 31st, 1700, he wrote that he had made 
himself unpopular to some in the colony by his stand on these 
questions. 118 Three months later, he stated that the amount of 
smuggling in Pennsylvania was very small, and that its prosper- 
ity was not due to unlawful practices. "For indirect trade I can- 
not upon my best observations find our peoples much blamable. 
Some few have, and still visit Curagoa, and this can not be helped, 



111 C. O., 5:1288, p. 11. 
™Ibid., pp. 98 et seq. 



113 C. O., 5:1275, pp. 248-50. 

In one seizure a parcel of East India Goods from Madagascar was 
found without a cocket. A valuation of £150 was placed upon it, al- 
though the goods were worth £1,000. 

114 C. O., 5:1288, pp. 201-2. 

115 Ibid., pp. 413 et seq. 

116 C. O., 5 :1289, p. 16. 

117 C. O., 5:1289, pp. 47-48. 

118 Ibid. 



Trade of the Delaware: District 269 

as the coast is 150 miles long and there are no waiters." 119 On 
the 2d of July, 1701, he wrote that the country was improving, 
not by "piracy or forbidden trade, but honest labour and sobriety, 
and I wish them that have recommended themselves by their 
officiousness, or would do so (having little else than shipping to 
lie upon) were half as honest and useful and honourable as those 
they have faulted." 120 

After receiving the report of the board of trade to the house 
of lords and house of commons, Penn sent another despatch on the 
26th of August, 1701, in which he again denied that he had op- 
posed the admiralty jurisdiction, or that Pennsylvania was guilty 
of an extensive illegal trade. He strongly opposed the bill, while 
it was pending in the house of lords. 121 A little later he returned 
to England and, through his influence, the bill was defeated. 122 

At this time the charges of smuggling concerned the trade in 
tobacco, which was the chief article of export. Large quantities 
were taken to Scotland and subsequently smuggled into England. 
It was thought that this was very prejudicial to England, both in 
defrauding the exchequer of revenue and allowing Scotch manu- 
factures to be sent back in return. Consequently, vigorous ef- 
forts were made to counteract the trade. Governor Nicholson, 
of Maryland, appointed Captain Meech to cruise in the waters 
adjacent to his colony for the purpose of stopping illegal trade. 
Some instances connected with his task reveal the amount to 
which Pennsylvania engaged in this contraband trade. Captain 
Meech found that a man by the name of Hamilton, who had been 
a trader in Virginia for a number of years, was now engaged in 
smuggling tobacco into England via Scotland, and bringing back 
Scotch merchandise, forging certificates and even going so 
far as to make false seals of the English customs houses. On one 
trip he had taken 300 hogsheads of tobacco and brought back a 
false cocket for 3,000 pounds of Scotch cloth and ticking, 30 



119 Ibid., p. 37. 

120 Ibid., pp. 203-4. 

121 Ibid., p. 47. 

122 C. O., 5:1290, p. 95. 



270 Smith Cou,e;ge Studies in History 

dozen of Scotch hose and 30 tons of sea cloth. In reporting this 
instance, Meech sent in a list of fifteen men engaged in this trade 
— besides noting that there were others whose names he could not 
remember. These traders had counterfeit seals of the customs 
houses of London, Bristol, Liverpool, Whitehaven, Newcastle, 
Berwick, Plymouth and Bytheford. 123 

Evidence of illegal trade between 1710-1750 is very vague. The 
loose connection between the colony and the mother country made 
it difficult to ascertain accurate information. The only sources 
were the governor's reports and the cases tried in the vice-ad- 
miralty. The former were usually very unreliable, as the gov- 
ernors were always eager to report that their provinces were in 
good order, 124 and when acting as judges of the vice-admiralty, 
they were especially anxious to make it appear that they were do- 
ing their duty. A case in 1724 illustrates this last point. Gov- 
ernor Keith wrote to the board of trade on the 25th of November, 
that he had made a seizure of the ship Fame, in spite of the negli- 
gence of the collector. The surveyor general's report, however, 
made the seizure appear to Keith's discredit. He claimed that the 
ship Fame, owned by a man named Pellin, a merchant in Rotter- 
dam, arrived in Philadelphia bringing over immigrants from the 
Palatinate. It also brought East India and European goods to 
the value of f20,000, a violation of 15 Charles II, chapter 7. 
The vessel was seized and the collector left six waiters on board 
to watch her. The following night, sixty or seventy persons in 
disguise forcibly boarded her and took the vessel below the 
town, landing a greater part of the prohibited goods. A few days 
later, Keith went on board the ship, making a pretence of a new 



123 C. O., 5:1287, Journal of Captain Meech. 

124 C. O., 5:1266, R. 7. 



Col. W. Hart said that there were three collectors in Pennsylvania to 
prevent illegal trade and he believed measures were effectual. Also that 
Pennsylvania had no trade with foreign Plantations except to Madeira, 
Cadiz, Alicante and Lisbon. Later, he said that on account of the vigilance 
of the officers very few seizures were made. 



Trade oe the Delaware District 271 

seizure, and the vessel was sold for about £600. 125 The collector 
protested that he and the king did not get their share of the seiz- 
ure. Finally, after appealing to the king and the lords justices, 
the collector was allowed to prosecute in the proper court in 
Pennsylvania, where he obtained a condemnation. 126 Another 
instance in which 15 Charles II, chapter 7, was violated occurred 
in 1726, when Joseph Brown was judge of the vice-admiralty. 
The inventory of this cargo shows plainly what goods were con- 
sidered useful in contraband trade. 127 

40 pieces of calico in four bales £60 0s. Od. 

10 casks of pepper 1200 lbs 80 

2 pieces of muslin 5 

10 pieces of silk 272 yards 40 16 

6 pieces of Holland 21 

21 pieces of Holland 63 

9 pieces of Holland 31 10 

48 pair of silk hose 17 

34 pieces of coarse linen 32 

12 pieces of ticking 54 

9 pieces of osnaburgs 24 06 09 

51 pieces of Renting 30 12 

8 pieces of striped linen 27 

28 bags, buttons, and bundle of mohair 4 

12 papers of thread 10 

brandy 6 15 

cordage 6 15 

Another feature of the smuggling was the undervaluation of 
goods, when the register and cocket appeared to be correct. 128 
Governor Keith said, in 1719, that one-third of the rum imported 
was not registered. 129 Instance after instance came up to show 
that this was true. One interesting case was that of Thomas 



125 C. O., 5:1266, R. 52. 

The goods taken in the seizure were : 2 cwt. of East India Tea, 1500 
gallons of brandy, 200 gallons of French spirits, 1200 gallons of Burgundy 
claret and champagne, 70 bis. of gun powder, 30 tons of cordage, 40 tons 
of iron, 2000 weight of cheese, 200 bolts of Dutch sail cloth. 

126 C. O., 5:1267, R. 93. 

127 Ibid., R. 112. 

128 C. O., 5:1267, R. 93. 

There were a great many cases in which the chief charge was the lack 
of a register. One came up in 1728. In this instance it was very evident 
that the vessel was of English build and it was released. 

129 C. O., 5:1265, Q. 176. 



272 Smith College Studies in History 

Hazel wood, in 1750. He was the master of the ship Sandwich 
which left Rotterdam with three hundred Palatines bound for 
Philadelphia. The vessel touched at Cowes and a cocket was 
produced. When it reached Philadelphia it produced another 
cocket. It was found that there was a wide discrepancy between 
the two documents and that the goods were not only greatly un- 
dervalued, but, under cover of bringing in the personal belong- 
ings of the immigrants, quantities of East India goods were smug- 
gled. Peter Randolph entered suit and was upheld by the court. 130 

The most serious charges, however, brought against the Del- 
aware district was that of carrying on illicit trade with the 
enemy in time of war. During the War of the Spanish Succes- 
sion, a flourishing trade existed with the Dutch and Spanish West 
Indies via the French West Indies, which nominally obtained 
their provisions from France. 131 The northern colonies exported 
to Curacoa from 1200 to 1500 tons of bread and flour annually, 
and imported in return quantities of rigging sail, canvas, goods 
for weaving, cocoa, linen, muslins and silks. 132 

Monte Christi 133 and St. Eustatius 134 were notorious smug- 
gling centers, where trade with foreign colonies was carried on 
with as much ease as if it were not prohibited by law. The mar- 
ket in the northern colonies was so glutted with French sugars, 
that the honest trader could not import sugars from the British 
West Indies, except at a great disadvantage and loss. 135 The 



130 Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss. Custom House, Vol. I. 
131 C. O., 5:1288, p. 271. 



132 C. O., 5:1292, pp. 206-7. 

133 C. O., 5:1275, W. 3. Letter from Townsend White to London Cor- 
respondent, October 23, 1755. 

Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, p. 96-108. A full treat- 
ment of the trade of Monte Christi is given here — its situation — its 
commercial insignificance before it was made a free port, reasons for 
making it a free port, and the illegal trade with the continental colonies. 

134 Chatham Papers, Bun. 96. 
135 Addit. Mss. 33030 f401. 
T. I. 476. Oct. 1756. 



Trade: otf the: Delaware: District 273 

surplus of this illegal importation was re-exported to England 
and southern Europe, passing as British sugars. 136 

While the trade with the foreign colonies was known before 
the Seven Years' War, its real significance had not been appre- 
ciated. This was largely due to the ignorance of the authorities 
in England concerning the trade between the continental colonies 
and the West Indies. When this war, which was to decide the 
struggles between England and France, was begun and every 
effort was made to injure the trade of the enemy, all of these 
illegalities were brought clearly to light. The recent excellent 
treatments of the trade regulations during the war, the colonial 
trade with the enemy, and the means adopted to check it, make it 
unnecessary to consider these subjects here. 137 It is sufficient to 
state that this illicit trade was on such an enormous scale that the 
British ministry, in 1763, felt justified in making more string- 
ent regulations concerning it. 



136 Beer, British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, p. 100, quoting letter from 
George Spenser to Amherst, America and West Indies, 95 (C. O. 5:60), 
and letter from Colden to Pitt, America and West Indies, 72 (C. O. 
5:19). 

T. I. 349. A long petition was presented May 7, 1763, from George 
Spenser in which there was a statement of the illicit trade with Monte 
Christi and fictitious clearances. 

137 Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765. Chapters V, VI, VII. 
Root, W. T., The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Govern- 
ment, 1696-1765, passim. 



CHAPTER II 

British Legislation, 1763-1773 

The British ministers of the period immediately preceding the 
American War of Independence accepted the conventional view 
of colonial empire. According to this view, the chief aim was to 
make the empire self-sufficing, and as a means to this end it was 
thought that the mother country should furnish necessary pro- 
tection to the colonies, who, in return, should render her obedi- 
ence. This conception of empire was severely tested at the close 
of the Anglo-French struggles of the 18th century, when the 
British Government was confronted with new problems of reve- 
nue and protection. As a preventive measure against future en- 
croachments of the French and Indians, it was considered neces- 
sary to provide an adequate defense on the frontier and in the 
newly acquired territories. It seemed only fair that the expendi- 
ture necessary for this purpose should be met in part by the col- 
onists, inasmuch as they had received, and would continue to 
receive, the greatest benefits. The experience of the Seven Years' 
War had proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that the colonies 
would not voluntarily assume their share of the burden. They 
had failed to furnish their full quotas 1 even under the stress of 
war, and it was not very likely that they would be more amenable 
in time of peace. This being the case, the only alternative was 
compulsion. In order to meet the necessary expense of this new 
system, efforts were made to obtain a larger revenue from the 
colonies through a series of laws relating to trade. Since the 
colonies were considered as parts of the empire rather than en- 
tities, the increase of the revenue from them was inseparably con- 
nected with imperial fiscal difficulties. For example, the sugar 
act was as much a part of the policy adopted towards France as 
that towards the colonies, and the tea act involved the relations 



X H. of L. Mss., Pennsylvania's debt during the war was £234,782, llr., 
3d. sterling. Of this, £91,391, 16s. sterling remained undischarged, to be 
raised by taxes in 1767, 1768, 1769, 1770, and 1771. 



Trade: of the Delaware District 275 

of the East India Company more than those of the colonies. The 
parliamentary acts of 1763-1773, considered from this point of 
view, were not oppressive, but were merely stern imperial meas- 
ures taken at a time when protection and strict economy were 
essential. 

The colonists, however, being almost wholly concerned with 
their own local troubles, could not appreciate this necessity. 
Anything which interfered with their interests or any law which 
seemed to benefit another colony to their detriment was received 
with deep resentment. In addition to holding this narrow pro- 
vincial view of trade, they were also influenced by their ideas of 
representative government, which led them to consider the power 
of legislation at an angle different from that adopted by the Brit- 
ish ministry. From their point of view, all of these acts were op- 
pressive to trade as well as a violation of political principles. 

Since the program of the ministry in 1763 was designed for 
the purpose of raising revenue, the discussion of the various acts 
will be limited as far as possible to the economic reasons for their 
adoption and the resistance to them. 

An analysis of the colonial trade legislation during this period 
reveals two methods by which the revenue was to be raised : 

(1) New trade regulations. 

(a) Reorganization of the vice-admiralty. 

(b) Establishment of a customs board in America. 

(c) Prohibitory measures against foreign trade. 

(2) New revenue acts. 

(1) New Trade Regulations 

The first of these methods was obviously designed to check 
smuggling. During the late war there had been an excessive 
amount of illegal trade with the French West Indies to the great 
detriment of British interests. According to a treasury report of 
October 4, 1763, the revenue from the colonial customs "is very 
small and inconsiderable having in no degree increased with the 
commerce of those countries, and is not yet sufficient to defray a 






276 Smith College: Studies in History 

fourth part of the expense necessary for collecting it." 2 The 
treasury board realized that this condition was due to the neglect 
and connivance which the existing system permitted. It seemed 
an opportune time for a thorough-going reform, especially as it 
was necessary to make some provision for the newly acquired 
territories. 

(a) The Reorganization of the Vice-Admiralty 

The reform began in the vice-admiralty. 3 This institution had 
apparently been established in America before 1696, as a com- 
mission was given to Fletcher in 1692, to act as judge of a district 
which included East and West Jersey, Pennsylvania and New 
Castle. 4 Little seems to be known concerning the institution at 
that date and even in 7 and 8 William III, c. 10, its powers were 
but vaguely outlined. According to this act it was supposed 
to try cases which involved breaches of the laws of trade and 
navigation. The proprietors of Pennsylvania, Carolina, the 
Bahamas, the Jerseys and the general court of Connecticut 
denied the necessity of such courts and claimed that their char- 
ters granted them admiralty jurisdiction. They also petitioned 
that their governors might have the same admiralty powers as the 
crown governors. It was decided, however, by the attorney-gen- 
eral that there was nothing in the charters of these colonies which 
prevented the establishment of vice-admiralty courts. 5 

A vice-admiralty court was established at Philadelphia which 
had jurisdiction over Pennsylvania, Delaware and West Jersey, 
and Robert Quary was appointed judge of the district. 6 This 
court met with opposition from the beginning. The chief ob- 



2 H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 1. 

Treasury Board Papers, I, 351. 

Adm. Papers, Out Letters, Bundle 1057. 

3 H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, Nos. 1-17, The reform in the vice-ad- 
miralty was extended over three years, 1763-1766. 

Admiralty Papers, Out Letters, Bundle 1057. 

4 Beer, G. L-, The Old Colonial Policy, Part I, Vol. I, p. 292 n. 1. 

C. O., 5 :1287, p. 31. 

Andrews, C. M., Guide to the materials for American history to 1783 
in the Public Record Office, Vol. II, p. 35. 

5 C. O., 5:1287, p. 14. 

6 Ibid., pp. 292-6. 



Trade: of the: Delaware: District 277 

jections were trial without jury and the encroachment of the mari- 
time courts upon the domain of the civil courts. David Lloyd 
voiced the sentiment of many when he declared "that all those 
that did in any way encourage or promote the setting up of the 
courts of admiralty in this province were greater enemies to the 
right and liberties of the people than those that promoted the 
ship-money in King Charles the First's time." 7 The opposition 
was so great that two laws were passed in the Pennsylvania as- 
sembly against the courts. One, in 1698, provided that all 
breaches of the trade laws should be tried under the common 
law and by a local jury. The other provided that no freeman 
should be tried or condemned in any case whatsoever, except by 
the lawful judgment of his equals or by the laws of the province. 
Both were disallowed because they were contrary to the statute 
of 1696. 8 

Although the terms of 7 and 8 William III c. 10, were ambig- 
uous, the vice-admiralty court acted according to these terms 
until 1764. During this time various interpretations were made 
of the duties and jurisdiction of the court at Philadelphia. When- 
ever the principal offices were held by men from outside of the 
province, there was considerable friction with the colonial gov- 
ernment ; while, on the other hand, there seemed to be little diffi- 
culty when colonists were appointed or when the governor acted 
as judge. The most trouble occurred during the administrations 
of Robert Quary, 1696-1713, and Josiah Brown, 1724-1728. 
Quary, being the first judge appointed, had to face the natural 
opposition aroused by the introduction of an institution which 
seemed to curtail the power of the regular colonial officials. Brown 
was the only other person from outside of the province to hold 
office for any length of time. The period between these two ad- 
ministrations and the period from 1728 to 1763 were compara- 
tively peaceful. This was no doubt due to the presence of col- 



7 Ibid. 

8 Charter and Laws of Pennsylvania, pp. 268-274. 
Pennsylvania Statutes at Large, Vol. II, pp. 18, 45. 



278 Smith Cou,ege Studies in History 

onial judges, who were lenient in their administration of the court 
and allowed the civil officials to encroach upon their jurisdiction. 9 

The problems which arose after 1696 centered about the 
method of condemning seizures, the relative jurisdiction of the 
civil and admiralty courts, absenteeism and the fee system. In 
the condemnation of seizures, as well as in other questions, the 
lack of an authority superior to the district courts was most detri- 
mental. The colonial courts were too remote to be supervised 
adequately by the English admiralty, and yet it was obvious at 
times that the purpose of the vice-admiralty was defeated through 
the absence of such control. In order to establish the authority 
of the courts the whole system was reorganized. A new court 
for all America was erected, which had concurrent powers with 
the district court and could exercise all the powers of the English 
admiralty except that of appeal. 10 

The statutes concerning the condemnation of seizures from 
12 Charles II to 3 George III varied so much in mode and place 
of trial that the officers were uncertain how to proceed. In 1764, 
it was decided that offences committed against any law of trade 
could be prosecuted, sued for, and recovered in any court of 
record or in any court of the admiralty or vice-admiralty, accord- 
ing to the wishes of the informer. If either party was not satis- 
fied with the decision, he could appeal to the vice-admiralty court 
which had jurisdiction in the district where the offence was com- 
mitted, and, if that had been the court in which the case originated 
or a further appeal was necessary, it was taken to the admiralty 
court in England. 11 

The limitations of the jurisdiction of the vice-admiralty had 
also been vaguely defined in the act of 1696. There had been a 



9 For a fuller discussion see Root, The Relations of Pennsylvania with 
the British Government, Chap. IV. 

10 H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 15. 
Admiralty Papers, Out Letters 1057. 

The question of appeals had been disputed since 1696. See Root, The 
Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Government, Chap. IV. 
C. O., 5:1288, pp. 109-113, 413. 

11 Ibid. 



Trade: of the: Delaware: District 279 

dispute between Quary and Penn concerning this matter. 12 Penn 
claimed that the vice-admiralty had no power on land and that it 
was necessary for it to go outside of the province to exert its 
control. On the occasion when a water bailiff was appointed, in 
the absence of Quary, the latter complained that the rights of 
the admiralty had been seriously invaded. This was not the case. 
The appointment was only an emergency measure. Penn defined 
his attitude clearly in his dispatch of December 10, 1700. 13 He 
said that the difficulty lay in the fact that the vice-admiralty and 
civil courts overlapped in their jurisdiction and disputes occurred 
on the border land. He pointed out further that there was no 
skilled lawyer in Pennsylvania who could settle disputes of this 
character. It seemed to him hardly possible that courts, estab- 
lished for the express purpose of trying offences against the acts 
of trade and navigation and for piracy, could be supposed to 
consider cases which arose within the limits of the province, how- 
ever much they concerned the sale of goods from vessels or work 
done on vessels. 

In 1702, Penn made further charges against Quary in this 
matter, claiming that he was ignorant of the law and that he at- 
tempted to extend his admiralty jurisdiction to cases which were 
clearly within that of the common law courts. 14 On account of 
the disputes which arose, the opinion of Sir Edward Northey, 
attorney-general, and Sir John Cooke, solicitor-general, wajs 
asked. They characterized the act 7 and 8 William III as "con- 
fused and dark" and in general upheld Penn's contention. 15 From 
that time it was fairly clear that the jurisdiction of the vice-ad- 
miralty did not extend to cases on land. The question came up, 
however, again and again. For this reason the act 4 George III c. 
15 stated clearly the limitations of the court. 16 When the Earl of 
Northumberland was made vice-admiral of all America, his power 
extended "throughout all and every the sea shoals, public streams, 



M C. O., 5:1288, p. 413. 

13 C. O., 5:1289, pp. 278-90. 

14 C. O., 5:1290, pp. 65-70. 
"Ibid., pp. 109-113. 

16 4 Geo. Ill, c. 15, sec. XLI. 



280 Smith College Studies in History 

ports, fresh water rivers, creeks, and arms as well of the sea as 
other rivers, and the coast whatsoever of all America and ter- 
ritories dependent thereon and maritime parts whatsoever of the 
same and thereto adjacent as well within the libertys, and fran- 
chises, as without, to take cognizance, and proceed in all causes 
civil and maritime and in complaints, contracts, offences, or pros- 
pective offences, arms, pleas, debts, exchanges, accounts, charters, 
party agreements, suits, trespasses, injurys, extortions and de- 
mands, civil and maritime, whatsoever commenced between mer- 
chants and proprietors of ships, etc." 17 In short, the jurisdiction 
of the vice-admiralty was extended to every case, civil as well as 
maritime, which had the remotest connection with trade. 

One of the chief defects of the system was absenteeism. 18 
The admiralty officials were not explicitly required by law always 
to be present in their district, and many of them were very negli- 
gent. On several occasions this had been considered a serious 
hindrance. Robert Quary wrote from Philadelphia on July 4, 
1698, that the admiralty court was in bad shape. "The register 
appointed by Randolph lives a hundred miles from Philadelphia, 
and the marshall also appointed by Randolph is not at present in 
the colony. Besides, the chief officer, the advocate, is in England, 
and does not intend to come to Pennsylvania." On this account 
he was unable to proceed to business. 19 At another time certain 
difficulties could have been averted had Quary himself been pres- 
ent. While he was absent, because of ill health and private busi- 
ness, some offences were committed in the river at Philadelphia 
and the water bailiff was instructed to prosecute the case. 20 In 
order that such occasions could not arise, the act of 1764 required 
all of the officers to remain constantly at their posts of duty. 21 



1T H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 11. 

18 H. of L. Mss. A report concerning the officers of the civil, military 
and admiralty establishments, delivered in the house of lords on the 20th 
of January, 1766, shows the amount of absenteeism in the colonies. 

Adm. Papers, Out Letters, Bundle 1057. 

19 C. O., 5:1287, pp. 228-233. 

20 Root, Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Government, 1696- 
1765, p. 107. 

21 H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 1. 
Admiralty Papers, Out Letters, 1057. 



Trade: of the: Delaware; District 281 

The fee system was largely responsible for this difficulty. The 
English government had always felt that it was out of the ques- 
tion to provide salaries for all of the officers of the vice-admiralty 
and in most instances the provincial government was unwilling to 
assist in any way. 22 The fees were never large enough to 
defray an officer's expenses, and, in times of great opposition, 
fear of imprisonment somtimes kept them from accepting any at 
all. 23 Quary wrote to the admiralty of England that he had 
"served his majesty for three years at his own cost and charge, 
and it had cost him a good deal of time, money, labour and haz- 
ard." 24 In order to make up the deficit, the officers were com- 
pelled to engage in private activities which took them away from 
their districts. 25 

To obviate these difficulties special provision was made, in 
1764, for salaries. 26 The vice-admiral of all America and the 
judge of the court were each to be paid £800 a year. The 
judges of the new district courts were also to have the same sal- 
aries as had previously been paid to the judge of the court at 
Halifax, which had been considered the most important court 
before the establishment of the one for all America. Thus the 
principal officers were supposed to be sufficiently compensated for 
their work and did not need to seek other means of earning a 
livelihood. 



22 C. O., 5 :1288, p. 413. 

When Roger Mempessen was appointed to succeed Quary, the latter 
informed the board of trade that Mr. Penn had recommended to his 
friends here in Pennsylvania that they "do amongst them settle £200 a 
year on the new judge." 

23 Root, W. T., The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British Govern- 
ment, 1696-1765, passim. 

24 C. O., 5:1288, p. 413. 

25 6 Anne, c. 37, sec. VII. 
13 George III, c. 3. 

29 George II, c. 34. 

The fees were definitely established by act of parliament in cases 
of prizes taken during a war, but fees in case of vessels condemned in 
seizures varied in amount. They were usually 10 per cent of the value 
of the seizure. Keith said, in 1727, that he received 7 1-2 per cent of 
all condemnations. 

26 H. of L. Mss. Adm. Papers, No. 15. 



282 Smith CoUvEge Studies in History 

The treasury board felt that the vice-admiralty in America 
should be strongly supported by the officials in other departments, 
civil and military. Therefore they petitioned that all the gov- 
ernors should be given strict instructions to suppress illegal trade, 
to exert their authority in protecting the officers of the revenue, 
and to transmit such observations as might occur to them on the 
state of trade. The military force was likewise requested to lend 
its aid in any emergency. The commanders-in-chief of his ma- 
jesty's ships and troops in America and the West Indies were ask- 
to give all possible assistance, to make such use of the forces 
under their respective commands as would be most serviceable in 
suppressing dangerous practices, and to protect the officers from 
the violence of any desperate and lawless persons who should 
attempt to resist the due execution of the laws. Furthermore 
it was suggested that a sea guard should be instituted to co- 
operate with the officers of the vice-admiralty, the military and 
the civil government. The improvement of the sea guard at home 
had been of great service in suppressing contraband trade, and 
it was thought that it would insure the obedience to law if one 
were placed in America. 27 

(b) 'Establishment of Customs Board in America 

A change in the colonial customs house system came soon 
after the reorganization of the vice-admiralty. The treasury 
board had suggested, in its report of October 4th, 1763, that the 
revenue might be increased by the following remedies : 

(1) All officers belonging to the customs in America and the 
West Indies should be fully instructed in their duty and should 
be compelled to remain constantly in their respective stations. 

(2) Regular and constant correspondence should be required, 
which would keep the treasury informed about their proceedings. 
This correspondence should include an account of any difficulties 
they might meet in discharging their respective duties ; also care- 
fully drawn up accounts of imports and exports of their district, 



2? H. of L. Mss., Adm. Papers, No. 1. 
Admiralty Papers, Out Letters, 1057. 



Trade of the: Delaware; District 283 

amount of illicit trade, observations on the efficacy or inefficacy 
of any existing regulations, and suggestions of such alterations as 
would lead to the further improvement of the revenue. 28 

These remedies were adopted, and as a result detailed instruc- 
tions were sent to all governors, surveyors-general, and custom 
house officers. 29 The number of circular letters inquiring about 
the state of trade and manufacture in each province increased 
rapidly, but the replies were not at all satisfactory. Some of the 
reports were unsystematic and unnecessarily long, while others 
were too meagre to be of any use. For this reason it was impos- 
sible to ascertain the amount of revenue from the colonies. A 
report made to the commissioners of the customs at London on 
the 3rd of April, 1767, concerning the duties in America, pointed 
out that "distance rendered correspondence with officers of the 
revenue very tedious and liable to uncertainty and interruption. 
Instructions and orders of the board could have but little effect — 
negligent, partial and corrupt officers, made various pretences 
either to defeat or elude the directions sent them, while the dili- 
gent and faithful officers, who were willing to do their duty, found 
great discouragement for want of ready assistance and informa- 
tion. 

"The truth of this general observation has been long known 
and felt, but the oppression which officers of the revenue labour 
under in America (more especially in some parts of the conti- 
nent) has lately grown to such an enormous height, that it is be- 
come impossible for them to do their duty, not only from the out- 
rages of the mob, but for fear also of vexatious suits, verdicts and 
judgments in the provincial courts. Assistance from the gov- 
ernors and the institution of surveyor-general of the customs in 
America is very inadequate. It would be imprudent at times to 
act as the guarding of the revenue demands. The variety of busi- 



28 H. of L. Mss., Adm. Papers, No. 1. 
Admiralty Papers, Out Letters, 1057. 
Treasury Papers, XI, 27, p. 318. 

29 C. O., 5:1233. Instructions to the governor from the secretary of 
state. It was during this time that John Penn received the letters referred 
to in the first chapter. 



284 Smith College Studies in History 

ness arising from the acts of navigation, trade and revenue in 
America depends almost wholly on the prudence and good con- 
duct of the surveyor-general, and the distance is too remote for 
him to be of adequate use." 30 

Between April and September, 1767, a careful investigation 
was made of the custom houses and their officials in America. It 
was finally decided that it would be economical in the end to 
establish a general customs board in America which would super- 
vise all the custom-houses on the continent and in the Bermudas 
and the Bahamas. A board of this nature was formally inaugu- 
rated by letters patent on September 8th, 1768. 31 

The principal duty of this board was to give information to 
the commissioners of the customs in London concerning the state 
of revenue in America. It was to all intents and purposes the 
colonial branch of the London custom house and the methods of 
the latter were adopted. 32 Consequently accounts were more 
carefully and systematically entered. Mr. Irving, the inspector- 
general of imports and exports and register of shipping, made out 
a table of accounts similar to the one which he meant to follow in 
his office and sent it to each port with instructions that they should 
make quoted reports according to this model. As a result, the 
shipping returns of all the colonies, from 1768 to 1773, were en- 
tered under the following general heads : . 

(1) Imports and exports to and from Great Britain and Ire- 
land. 

(2) Imports and exports to and from Southern European 
ports ; Africa and the Wine Islands. 

(3) Imports and exports to and from the West Indies. 



30 Treasury Board Papers, I, 459; XXVIII, I. 

31 Ibid., XI, 28, p. 145. 



32 The extent to which this board was effective may be found in letters 
among the Admiralty Papers II 3866; in the accounts which were sent 
to the lords of the treasury from the custom house, Boston, beginning 
September 8, 1767 — Custom House Establishment Books, Custom House, 
London; and in the letters sent by the American board of commissioners 
to the various collectors and comptrollers of the colonies, — Custom 
House Miscellanea 16. Register of Letters Outward beginning January 
5, 1768. 



Trade: oe the Delaware District 285 

(4) Imports and exports coast wise. 

(5) Account of duties on exports and imports. 33 

This was a great improvement on the old hap-hazard method 
of keeping accounts. Mr. Irving wrote in 1770 concerning the 
matter : 

"Previous to the establishment of this board the customs were 
drawn in a very confused, imperfect and inaccurate manner. The 
accounts of imports being entirely omitted by reason of the multi- 
plicity of articles of which said cargoes generally consist, and the 
imports and exports to and from neighboring colonies (which 
commonly pass under the denomination of coasting trade) being 
seldom if ever inserted in the accounts, and even such goods and 
commodities as were brought into the account were not arranged 
in any order or method, nor were the real quantities thereof ascer- 
tained with proper precision, so it was merely impossible for me to 
keep an account of import and export either for the information 
of government or to be a check upon illicit trade agreeable to 
the end and design of my appointment." 34 

(c) Prohibitory Measures Against Foreign Trade 

One of the chief reasons for a more thorough supervision of 
trade was the enforcement of the "enumerated" policy as out- 
lined in the navigation act of 1660, 35 the staple act of 1663 36 and 
the colonial act of 1673. 37 While two of these acts were originally 
directed against the Dutch, the principle upon which they rested 
was the economic independence of the empire. The aim was to 
encourage the production of raw material in the colonies and to 
make England the center for manufacturing. To offset the dis- 
advantage to the colonies of requiring them to send their sugar, 
tobacco, cotton, wool, indigo, ginger, logwood, fustic and other 
dyeing wood, and cocoa nuts directly to England or to some other 
British colony, 38 an attempt was made, by means of bounties and 



33 Customs 16:1. 

84 Treasury Board Papers I, 476. 

35 12 Charles II, c. 18. 

36 15 Charles II, c. 7. 

37 25 Charles II, c. 7, sec. 5. 

38 Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, Chap. X. passim. 



286 Smith College: Studies in History 

preferential tariffs, to secure the English market for certain col- 
onial staples. For a district which enjoyed a direct trade with 
the mother country, these regulations could work little hardship, 
but in those districts, such as the Delaware, which depended upon 
circuitous routes there was little sympathy for such a policy. 
Before 1764, the only enumerated article which seriously affected 
the trade of this district was sugar, as tobacco had ceased to be 
of importance early in the century. In that year, 39 however, the 
enumerated list was enlarged, the chief additions being lumber 
and iron. The colonists complained of this legislation, and in 
order to minimize their distress parliament passed another act, 
in 1765, providing for the payment of bounties on these products. 

This relieved the situation to some extent, but it was generally 
regarded in the northern colonies as inadequate compensation for 
the hardship of having the articles on the enumerated list. On 
account of its bulk and smallness of value, lumber could not, as a 
rule, be sold at a profit if it had to reach its final market by way 
of England. 40 The same was true of iron. John Dickinson said, 
"Indeed, to require us to send all our iron to Great Britain is, in 
the opinion of some of our most judicious merchants, to require 
an impossibility. For, as the article is so heavy and such small 
quantities can be sent on one vessel, they assert that we cannot 
send freight directly home for one-half of it." 41 

The additions to the enumerated list in the act of 1764 were 
not so objectionable as the new restrictions placed upon the trade 
with the West Indies and the minute regulations made for inter- 
colonial commerce. The traders of the Delaware district had al- 
ways been vitally concerned in attempts to prevent the continental 
colonies from using the foreign West Indian markets, and had 
made protests whenever the matter was brought up. Mr. Paris, 
agent of Pennsylvania, presented a memorial, in 1731, which gave 
reasons why the monopoly which the assemblies of the Barbadoes, 
Antigua and St. Christophers demanded, would be injurious to 



39 4 Geo. Ill, c. 15. 

40 Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765, Chap. X. passim. 

41 Chatham Papers. Bundle 97. 



Trade of the Delaware District 287 

British trade in general. He said that "Pennsylvania may be 
called one of the bread colonys," and he pointed out that she im- 
ported more manufactures from Great Britain than the other 
three colonies together. 42 Furthermore, he said that she obtained 
means for purchasing merchandise through trade in food stuffs 
with the West Indies — the foreign as well as the British. Since 
the latter could not consume the surplus of the bread colonies nor 
furnish the northern colonies with all the molasses, sugar and 
rum required, it seemed more correct to promote the trade than 
to curtail it. 

In 1733, the West Indies, from the point of view of trade, 
were by far the most important colonies of the British Empire. 
Compared with them — especially the sugar islands — the continen- 
tal colonies were insignificant. On account of this, everything was 
done to promote their welfare. The molasses act was passed, as 
the government thought that legislation compelling the continental 
colonies to purchase their molasses and sugar from the British 
West Indies would necessarily increase the prosperity of those 
islands which were already occupied and would strengthen the 
British in their struggle with the French for the possession of 
St. Lucia, Dominica and St. Vincent. Conditions, however, 
changed considerably during the next thirty years. 43 The con- 
tinental colonies developed much more rapidly than the West In- 
dies, and a very flourishing trade sprang up between the northern 



42 C. O., 5:1267, S. 13. 

B. T. Commercial Series II, Vol. 414. The statistics given in this 
volume do not bear out this statement. From Christmas, 1731 to Christ- 
mas, 1732 the exports from England were as follows : 

Pennsylvania £41,698 Montserrat £2,075 

Antigua 22,376 Nevis 4,666 

Barbadoes 60,191 St. Kitts 18,024 

Jamaica 132,780 

C. O, 5:1267, S. 34. 

It is hardly possible that the situation was as Mr. Paris presented it 
because Governor Gordon said in 1731 that Pennsylvania did not have a 
large trade with the foreign plantation, sending only three or four vessels 
to Surinam and perhaps one to Curacoa and sometimes one to St. 
Eustatius, but none to the Spanish or French colonies. 

43 Dickinson, John, Late Regulations. Memoirs of the Historical So- 
ciety of Pennsylvania, Vol. XIV, pp. 221-2. 



288 Smith College Studies in History 

colonies and the foreign islands in violation of the molasses act. 
The British West Indies were no longer capable of taking all of 
the goods of the northern colonies or of furnishing them with 
sufficient West Indian produce. 

The Delaware traders were the chief offenders. The small 
amount of duties collected from this act shows how inadequately 
it was enforced. Only £600 6s. lOd. were collected on merchan- 
dise and £141 lis. 9d. on prize goods, from 1733 to 1750. Vio- 
lations of the act were also brought to light in the proceedings 
and viva voce evidence taken before the commissioners of trade 
and plantations in 1750. 44 In this investigation testimony was 
given by merchants of London trading with the sugar islands, 
who thought that it would be prejudicial to their interests, if the 
illicit trade were allowed to continue. They called attention to 
the manner and the degree in which the northern colonies, more 
particularly Rhode Island and Pennsylvania, had evaded the law. 
In times of war, "it was done by flags of truce, sometimes with 
only one, two or three prisoners, and sometimes purchasing pris- 
oners for that purpose, and, since the war, in an open and regular 
course. It was a known fact that the northern colonies consumed 
great quantities of French and foreign rum, sugar and molasses, 
and it was well known that they never paid any duties for it. 
Vessels have cleared from Rhode Island to Jamaica, have gone to 
some other British settlement, have sold their lumber for specie, 
refusing rum and molasses, and have gone to some foreign settle- 
ment and bought a cargo of rum and molasses with that specie 
and, sometimes, linen, silks, East India goods and other pro- 
hibited merchandise." 

In this investigation some of the reasons for trading with the 
French were brought out. In the first place, the lumber pro- 
duced in the French colonies on the continent was not so useful 
for their puncheons and hogsheads as that grown in the northern 
English colonies, and it was less difficult to import it from the 
northern colonies than from Canada or Louisiana. Secondly, 



44 C. O., 5 :38. Proceedings and Viva Voce Evidence Taken Before the 
Commissioners of Trade and Plantation in 1750. 



Trade of the Delaware District 289 

provisions and specie were very scarce in these plantations and, 
if the merchants could not exchange their West Indian products 
for lumber and provisions, they were reduced to extreme neces- 
sity. Thirdly, since lumber alone was sometimes sent, and a 
cargo of it was not always sufficient to purchase the required 
amount of rum, molasses and sugar in the French colonies, specie 
was demanded in the British sugar islands instead of products, to 
make up the balance. 45 

The British West Indian merchants suffered considerably 
from this trade as it took away most of their specie and prevented 
them from selling their products in North American markets. 
Consequently, they petitioned for an act which would prohibit the 
trade more effectively. They suggested a more thorough-going 
supervision of ports and certification of goods. 

The act which resulted from these petitions was clearly in line 
with the reforms in the vice-admiralty. The detailed regulations 
in respect to the loading and unloading of goods presuppose an 
active vice-admiralty court and the co-operation of a water-guard, 
a military force and the civil government. The aid of these in- 
stitutions was necessary to enforce such provisions as : (1) that, 
before any vessel could take on its enumerated goods the owner 
must take out bonds to the value of the goods and certify that 
they were going to Great Britain or to some British plantations ; 
(2) that no ship should be cleared from Great Britain or the 
colonies unless the entire cargo was laden and shipped to one 
destination; (3) that the certificate for entry and discharge must 
be under the hand and seal of the customs officer, comptroller, 
collector of customs and four of the commissioners in London or 
three in Edinburgh. Careful provision was made for damage 
suits. An officer could not be sued for damage in case of seized 
goods, the owner could not recover costs, and persons who claimed 
seized goods were obliged to deposit security to cover the costs of 
the suit. 46 



45 Ibid. 

46 4 Geo. Ill, c. 15, sec. XII, XXVII, XXX, XLIV. 

C. O., 5:1233. Orders and Instructions to Thomas and Richard Penn, 
April, 1767. 



290 Smith College Studies in History 

The sugar act was not merely a revenue measure, but, like the 
molasses act, it was also intended to direct trade into certain chan- 
nels. New duties were imposed upon foreign coffee and pimento, 
oriental and French goods, and wine from Spain and Portugal. 
Madeira wine re-exported from Great Britain was allowed a 
drawback of £3 per ton. Since the duty upon the direct importa- 
tion was £10 per ton, it was thought that this would cause the 
trade to go by way of the mother country. The molasses act was 
made perpetual, with the duty on foreign molasses and syrups 
reduced to 3d. a gallon, the duty on foreign sugars raised to £1 7 s. 
per cwt. and the importation of foreign rum or spirits absolutely 
prohibited. The two and one-half per cent duty on foreign goods 
re-exported from Great Britain was not paid, nor was any part 
of the old five per cent subsidy drawn back. 47 

These were all significant changes which were meant to benefit 
certain parts of the empire by giving preference to their in- 
dustries. Beside this, every effort was made to make Great Brit- 
ain the entrepot for the whole empire, with the hope that the duties 
paid into the British exchequer would be increased thereby and 
that smuggling would be decreased by a more careful supervision 
of exports and imports. 

This measure was very unpopular in the northern colonies. 
In the first place they felt that it was unjust to promote the in- 
terests of some of the dominions at the expense of others. John 
Dickinson, writing to William Pitt in December, 1765, said con- 
cerning the matter: "In this light the restrictions laid on their 
trade to the foreign plantations in the West Indies are regard- 
ed and will be regarded. The natural consequences of these re- 
strictions are to impoverish the continental colonies, to render 
them dissatisfied, and gradually to break off their connection with 
Great Britain by lessening their demands for manufactures." 48 

One argument, given in support of this view in a paper en- 
dorsed "Mr. Huske's Scheme for Free Ports in North America," 



47 4 Geo. Ill, c. 15. 

48 Chatham Papers, Vol. 97. Letter from John Dickinson to William 
Pitt, 1765. 



Trade of the Delaware District 291 

has a very modern ring. After pointing out that it ought to make 
little difference what foreigners did, since the West India planters 
were unable to supply the markets of the continental colonies, he 
said, "setting aside its not injuring our sugar planters, do not 
these supplies to foreigners and the advantages made of the re- 
turns also give support to our northern plantations ? Does it not 
make them more useful and beneficial to the mother country and 
does not the supplying foreign colonies with what they want 
and taking from them that they produce, so far as this extends 
make them colonies of Great Britain, and this too, without the 
expense of supporting and defending them? 

"France and Spain, fully sensible of the immense advantages 
we reap from trading with their colonies in the West Indies, have 
done and continue to do all in their power to prevent it, except 
for articles which their colonies occasionally want. And we have, 
ever since the late peace, done their business for them more effec- 
tually than they could have done it for themselves, when from all 
considerations and in every point of view we ought to have done 
the reverse." 49 

Secondly, the increased list of enumerated goods and the pro- 
viso that even non-enumerated goods should not be sent to ports 
north of Cape Finisterre, unless they had touched at Great Brit- 
ain, were considered very harmful. One pamphleteer said con- 
cerning sugars, and this would apply to other articles as well, "if 
we go to Great Britain first and land them there, it will prove so 
expensive by the delay and charges of loading and unloading and 
reshipping, and also a double freight insurance, that the trade 
cannot be carried on to any advantage, especially in time of war. 
If we carry these sugars direct to a foreign market by license from 
Great Britain, the difficulties and embarrassments are still greater, 
as the vessel in which any sugars are to be shipped must first go to 
Great Britain and the master enter into bonds there, before a 
license can be procured, during which time the sugars are to re- 
main in the king's stores here, and after they are delivered in a 



4a Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 318. Mr. Huske's Scheme for Free Ports 
in North America, 1765. 



292 Smith Coixsge Studies in History 

foreign port, the vessel must return to Great Britain to cancel the 
bonds, before she can proceed in any other voyage — though the 
liberty granted to carry these sugars directly to foreign ports by 
license, might be intended as an encouragement to the trade, the 
regulations and restrictions are such as will effectually defeat 
this very design." 50 

The multiplicity of bonds and cockets and the tedious delays 
which they caused constituted a third objection. Besides the 
bonds required for enumerated goods, the master of the vessel 
was not allowed to take in any more enumerated goods without 
first giving another bond with surety. By this act, bonds were 
also required for the coasting trade. Before a cocket could be 
taken out, oath had to be made stating when, by whom, and in 
what vessel the article was intended to be exported. At times 
information could not be obtained at once and the delay was apt 
to cause embarrassment. 51 

An extract from a letter written by an American concerning 
the British legislation from 1765-69, gives a very good example 
of the general feeling: 

"Pardon me, honorable sir, when I say that it is the opinion of 
most of us in North America, that the British legislature for the 
last two years have been entirely misinformed of the true state of 
these colonies, — and the real advantage accruing from their com- 
merce with their mother country. For (exclusive of the stamp 
act) the duties upon foreign sugars, molasses, wine, etc., not 
only lessen the number of shipping, but in a great measure pre- 
vent the merchants from means of making remittances home for 
the incredible quantities of woollen, cutlery, and other British 
manufactures. Besides, every dollar or pistol paid in duties 
takes off so much from the sums remitted for British manu- 
factures ; because nine-tenths of the specie imported amongst us 
from the Dutch free ports, the Spanish Islands and Main, have 
constantly in peace been sent home, and we not having one-quarter 



50 Pamphlet. Observations on the Several Acts of Parliament by a 
Boston Merchant. 

51 Ibid. 



Trade of the Delaware District 293 

enough of our own produce in this and neighboring provinces for 
the necessary remittances. Specie and foreign sugars have ever 
made up the deficiency. But those not being any longer to be 
had, new methods must be fallen upon to clothe us." 52 He also 
pointed out that there was not enough specie in the colonies to 
pay for such duties as the stamp act demanded for one year. 

(2) New Revenue Measures 

The first act passed for revenue alone was the one which 
granted and applied certain duties in the form of stamps on pa- 
pers, documents, pamphlets, etc., for the purpose of defraying the 
expenses of protecting the colonies. As in the case of the vice- 
admiralty reforms, means were provided for collecting these 
duties. Six thousand pounds were to be paid out of the sinking 
fund for meeting the necessary expenses of carrying the act into 
execution. 53 This sum was to be used in salaries to the various 
officers who would be in charge of collecting the duties. The fol- 
lowing were the salaries granted: £10 additional per annum to 
the chamber keeper; £40 additional per annum to the receiver 
general; £50 additional per annum to the comptroller; £100 to a 
new secretary to the comptroller; £20 to a second clerk to the 
comptroller; £50 to the packer and messenger of the American 
stamp warehouse; £100 and eight per cent of monies collected to 
the distributors of stamps and 20.?. per day for their traveling 
charges when out upon their inspection. 54 

This act was the result of a plan which had been proposed a 
long time before. 55 To the British statesmen of the period it was 
clearly within the limits of parliamentary jurisdiction, as was 
shown by the vote in both houses. The commons passed it by a 



52 Chatham Papers, Vol. 97, Proposal signed by an American Farmer. 
83 H. of L. Mss. Paper marked Treasury Chambers, 9 July, 1765. 

54 H. of L. Mss. Paper marked Stamp Office, 27 April, 1765. 

Mr. Bretell, Secretary to the Commissioner of Stamps, to Mr. Jenkin- 
son, Secretary of the Treasury. 

55 Addit. Mss., 33030, f . 376. "Reasons humbly offered in support of a 
proposal lately made to extend the duties in stamp paper and parchment 
all over the British Plantations." 

Beer, G. L., British Colonial Policy, pp. 38-41. 



294 Smith Coixegs Studies in History 

vote of 250 to 49, and it passed the lords without a division. It 
appeared to do away with the many difficulties inseparably con- 
nected with port duties and appropriations. To the colonists it 
represented all that they had grown to feel was tyrannical and 
unjust. They saw in it a violation of an abstract principle which 
those responsible for the measure did not recognize. On account 
of this wide difference of opinion concerning taxation, the oppo- 
sition to the act in America was predominantly political. The 
resistance, however, had also an economic basis. The act was 
economically untenable on account of the scarcity of coin, and 
would no doubt have been a hindrance to trade, if it had been 
enforced. 56 The small amount of specie in this district was for 
the most part Spanish coin which came through the West Indian 
trade or by smuggling. Paper currency was the usual medium 
of exchange. While this answered the purposes of the trade 
within the district, its depreciation rendered it useless outside. 57 
It could not be used for remittance to Great Britain and was not 
accepted in payment of duties. Thus any bill such as the stamp 
act, which demanded sterling in payment was not only a hard- 
ship, but impossible of execution because there was no metallic 
money available. 58 

In the examination of merchants before the house of lords 
this point was clearly brought out. A merchant was asked if he 
thought that a modification of the stamp act, so as to permit the 
colonies to pay in goods instead of specie, would make it reason- 
able. He answered in the affirmative. To the question, "If the 
stamp act had been executed without opposition, would you have 
usually answered orders," he replied, "I should have considered 
them disabled to the amount of the tax and would therefore 
shorten my credit." The same merchant also said that, if the act 



56 Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 163. Franklin said, in his examination before 
the house of lords, that the act was impracticable because the posts did 
not go back into the country. 

57 C. O., 5 :1289, pp. 17-31. 

58 C. O, 5:1270. 
T., I, 471. 

Paper Currency was worth 35 per cent exchange on London, in 1723, 
but rose to 70 per cent before the close of the colonial period. 



Trade of thi; Delaware; District 295 

continued and was submitted to, he would decline to send goods, 
except when they were paid for in advance. 59 

As the act was never enforced in Pennsylvania, hardship of 
this sort was not felt ; but the determination not to obey it ob- 
structed trade in such a way that many feared its consequence. 
The date set for the enforcement of the measure was November 
1st. In spite of the lateness of the season nothing was done for a 
month. In the meantime vessels were not allowed to clear with- 
out stamped paper, and the distributors, fearing the violence of 
the mob, did not distribute the stamps. On December 1st, 1765, 
the collector and comptroller wrote to the commissioners of the 
customs : 

"We make no doubt that your honours will have heard, long 
before this reaches you, of the opposition made in all parts of 
America to the stamp act and that the papers are arrived in the 
different colonies [and that] the people will not receive them nor 
suffer them to be used. We have been ever since the first of 
November (when the act was to commence) and for a long time 
before deliberating about what part would be proper for us to act, 
or rather whether it would be prudent of us to act at all, as offi- 
cers of the customs without stamp paper. And we still are at a 
loss how to determine. We have not yet done anything since the 
1st of Novemebr, but people, who have vessels loaded, begin to 
be very uneasy and clamorous. The winter is near at hand and 
we may expect in a short time that our navigation will be stopt by 
ice. The harbour is full of vessels and, if we don't begin soon 
to permit them to depart they will probably be shut up all winter, 
which will occasion great distress, and perhaps ruin to many of 
His Majesty's subjects, and at the same time be a means of lessen- 
ing the revenue of customs. 

"What we have said above is on a supposition that it is in 
our power to detain them ; but that is not the case. We dare not 
do it if we would. People will not sit and see their interest suffer 
and perhaps ruin brought upon themselves and families when 



59 Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 163. 

Examination of Merchants before the House of Lords, 1765. 



296 Smith Coixsge Studies in History 

they have it in their power to redress themselves. What has 
lately happened at New York (and the same spirits prevail as 
strongly here) is sufficient to convince us that it is in vain for us 
to contend against the general voice of a united people. We have 
not the least hopes of enforcing the act by anything that we can 
do, at present. The people of all ranks are so averse to it that we 
do not know whether they had rather see the city laid in ashes 
than submit to it. We may lessen ourselves in the esteem of the 
people and expose the weakness of your power to put this or 
any other law into execution, if at this time we obstinately refuse 
to comply with their requests ; and we can see no good conse- 
quences that can possibly ensue from it, so that upon the whole 
we are of opinion that it will be best to let the business of the 
custom house to go on as usual till we receive instructions to the 
contrary. The surveyor general is of this opinion, but he does not 
choose to give us any orders as he cannot undertake to indemnify 
us against the penalties of an act of parliament. As this is an 
unprecedented case, we have no rule to walk by and, therefore 
hope the most favourable construction will be put on our con- 
duct. We have waited thus long in order to be at a greater cer- 
tainty whether the stamps were to be had or not. As there is not 
the least possibility of getting them, we must submit to necessity 
and do without them, or else in a little time people will learn to 
do without them, or us, as no custom-house officer in America 
dare venture to seize a vessel, even if she came without any 
papers at all." 60 

Seven days later, Charles Stuart, surveyor-general in America, 
wrote to the commissioners of the customs thus : "All of the 
distributors of stamps between Halifax and St. Augustine have 
been compelled to resign their commissions, and no stamp paper 
can be obtained in all these countries. This has thrown them into 
great confusion. The courts of law are shut, redress for injuries 
cannot be obtained, debts recovered nor property secured nor 
transferred. But the evils necessarily occasioned by a stop to the 



60 H. of L. Mss., 1, December, 1765, Extract of a letter from the col- 
lector and comptroller of Philadelphia to the commissioner of the customs. 



Trade oe the Delaware District 297 

internal business and police of the colonies, are not equal to the 
consequences of shutting up their ports at this season of the 
year. Permit me briefly to enumerate a few of them. Thousands 
of seamen and others, whose sole dependence is on navigation are 
not only rendered useless to their country, but deprived of the 
means of subsistence ; provisions, for which at this time there are 
large orders, particularly for corn for France and Spain, Portu- 
gal, the Mediterranean, etc., must perish on hand, while famine 
may spread through our West Indian Islands, by being suddenly 
cut off from their usual supplies ; Ireland would be greatly dis- 
tressed for want of flax seed from hence on which her linen 
manufacture depends ; other articles of produce by which remit- 
tance may be made are detained in this country, the revenue les- 
sened, and trade and navigation, the source of wealth and the 
support of the maritime and commercial nation, entirely stopped, 
which must be attended with ruin to multitudes and distress to 
all. These are weighty considerations, but a stronger induce- 
ment for proceeding to business here and at New York still re- 
mains. 

"The officers at both places have by their address and prudence 
evaded for a full month granting clearances, in hopes that some 
way would be opened by which they might be extricated out of 
their difficulties ; that time did not pass without strong applica- 
tion and even threats, which they had great reason to believe 
would soon become very serious. It is supposed there are now 
in this port 150 sail of vessels. The frost generally sets in about 
Christmas, and continues upward of two months. Nothing is 
more certain than that so great a number of seamen shut up for 
that time in a town destitute of all protection to the inhabitants, 
even of militia, would commit some terrible mischief, or rather 
they would not suffer themselves to be shut up, but would com- 
pel the officers to clear vessels without stamps. This would un- 
doubtedly have been the consequences of a few days longer delay, 
and I need not add it would have been highly imprudent to have 
hazarded the event. The least evil attending it would in all proba- 



298 Smith Coixege Studies in History 

bility have been the loss of about five thousand pounds belonging 
to the revenue of the custom house." 61 

The political opposition became so great that the act was re- 
pealed in 1766. At the same time changes were made in the sugar 
act of 1764 which had caused so much discontent. The duty on 
molasses was lowered to Id. per gallon. Export duties were im- 
posed upon oriental and French goods, and the colonial import 
duties on these articles were repealed. Coffee and pimento were 
charged with import duties when coming into Great Britain, in- 
stead of the former export duties. 62 

The repeal of the stamp act completely defeated the British 
ministry in their attempt to raise revenue. There is little doubt 
but that they were at a loss to find some way to meet the large 
expense of the elaborate machinery set up in the colonies. Fur- 
thermore, in spite of the fact that men like Chatham and Burke 
were pointing out the fallacy of their method, the ministers did 
not seem to grasp the distinctions which the colonists drew be- 
tween internal and external taxation. Thinking that he was mak- 
ing a difference Charles Townshend drew up the act which im- 
posed duties on glass, paper, painters' colors, red and white lead, 
and tea. 63 It seems strange, if his motive was purely economic, 
that articles such as glass, paper, painters' colors and lead should 
be chosen. They were not necessities and the manufacturers of 
these articles depended largely upon the colonial market. 

The objections raised against this act were also principally 
political. It would have meant a slight hardship to pay the duties 
on account of the lack of specie, but that consideration was in- 
significant compared with the desire to defeat the underlying 
principle of taxation. The belief that taxation without repre- 
sentation was unjust was becoming more widely accepted, and by 
1770, had completely eclipsed the economic motive for resistance. 



61 H. of L. Mss., Letter from Charles Stuart, surveyor-general in 
America to the commissioner of the customs. 

62 6 Geo. Ill, c. 52. 

63 7 Geo. Ill, c. 56. 



Trade: of the Delaware; District 299 

In that year the ministry were compelled to repeal all the duties 
imposed in 1767 except that on tea. 64 

The tea duty has received a great deal of attention in accounts 
of this period of colonial history. It has always been considered 
as the supreme test of the ability of the colonies to maintain their 
principles of taxation, and as such has held an important place in 
their political annals. From the point of view of imperial trade 
the issue was more complicated. The East India Company and 
its relation with the home government between 1767 and 1773, 
gave rise to numerous troublesome questions. 65 Moreover, the 
problem demands attention here because the colonial trade was 
deeply concerned. In order to present the real position of the 
government and the economic reasons why the act was passed, it 
is necessary to discuss the fiscal difficulties which arose between 
the government and the East India Company. 

In the early part of the eighteenth century the East India 
Company had become the sole legal carrier of tea to England and 
her colonies. 66 The use of tea had become very prevalent, and as 
a result the company was making enormous profits. In 1767, 
when it was taken as one of the articles upon which a duty was 
imposed, the company, in order to extend the home consumption 
and exportation of tea, applied to the house of commons, "to take 
off for a limited time the inland duty of one shilling per pound 
weight on all black and single teas consumed in Great Britain, 
and to allow a drawback on all custom house duties 67 upon tea 
exported to Ireland and the British dominions in North America 
for a limited time, and they declared themselves willing to indem- 
nify the public in respect to the said drawback and inland duty 



M 10 Geo. Ill, c. 17. 

65 C. O. 5:1283, p. 59. Maryland Gazette, 25 January, 1770, American 
opinion concerning the repeal of the revenue act. 

66 Treasury Solicitor Papers. Bundle 3321. 

67 Farrand, M., The Taxation of Tea 1767-1773— [Am. Hist. Review, 
Vol. 3, p. 266.] 

The custom duties "consisted of the Old and New subsidies, and other 
subsidies granted at various times, which amounted, in 1767, to £23, 
18s. 7l-2d. on every £100 of the gross price, or about 24 per cent. 

Baldwin, Survey of British Customs (London, 1779) Part II, pp. 26-31. 



300 Smith Coujsge; Studies in History 

taking the said inland duty and the duties of customs so to be 
drawn hack at a medium of five years." 68 

The petition was granted, and, on the first of September, 
1768, the treasury applied for the sum of £57,419 Ss. 6d., which 
according to their account was due from the East India Company. 
Their method of reckoning was as follows : 

The net produce of all the duties 
of customs upon teas for five years 
ending the Sth of July, 1767 $1,333,346 14s. 9d. 

The net produce of all the excise 
duties upon teas for five years 
ending the Sth of July, 1767 2,261,483 10 5 

Total £3,594,830 5*. 2d. 

Average £718,966 U. Od. 

The net produce of all the 
duties of customs upon teas for 
the year ending 5th July, 1768.... £382,981 14^. 4d. 

The net produce of all the duties 
of excise upon teas for the year 
ending 5th July, 1768 310,867 5 8 

Total £693,849 0s. Od. 

The net produce of all the duties 
of customs upon the importation 
of teas which were exported to 
Ireland and the British colonies in 
America for five years ending July 
5, 1767, amounted to £161,511 2s. 6d. 

Average £32,302 4.?. 6d. 

£661,546 15s. 6d. 
Amount due from the East India 
Company £57,419 15.?. 6d. 

The director of the company objected to the accounts on the 
ground that the duties of customs for the year ending the 5th 
of July, 1768, were understated. The account drawn up accord- 
ing to the directors stood thus : 



68 Treasury Solicitor Papers. Bundle 3321. 

The company promised to pay the deficit within forty days after the 
5th of July in each year, if, after the deduction of the average amount of 
duties of customs on tea exported from England to Ireland and America, 
the amount in the exchequer was not equal to the previous average amount. 



Tradk of the Delaware District 301 

The net produce of all the duties 
of customs upon teas for five years 

ending 5th July, 1767 £1,333,346 14*. 9d. 

The net produce of all the duties 
of excise upon teas for five years 
ending the 5th July, 1767 2,261,483 10 5 

Total £3,594,830 5*. 2d. 

Annual Average £718,966 1*. Od. 

The net produce of all the duties 
of customs upon teas for the year 
ending 5th July, 1768 £441,063 2s. lOd. 

The net produce of all the duties 
of excise upon teas for the year 
ending the 5th of July, 1768 £310,867 5*. Sd. 

Total £751,930 8*. 6d. 

The net produce of all the duties 
of customs upon the importation 
of teas which were exported to 
Ireland and the British colonies in 
America for five years ending the 
5th July, 1767, amounted to £161,511 2s. 6d. 

Average £32,302 4*. 6d. 

£719,628 4*. 0d. CT 
Amount due from East India Co 662 3s. Od. 

The treasury pointed out that the sum of £441,063 2s. lOd. was 
made up of two parts, duties on importations of teas consumed 
at home, £382,981 14^. Ad., and duties upon importation of teas 
afterwards exported, £58,081 Ss. 6d. The company held that 
since the sum equal to the average annual net produce of the 
duties paid upon the importation of teas exported to Ireland and 
America were to be deducted, no other amount ought to be. They 
considered that, if they had to pay £58,081 Ss. 6d., then they were 
paying twice for the drawback, and to support the argument they 
quoted the clause beginning "so as the money to be paid by the 
said company shall not exceed the annual net produce during the 
five years." 

To this, the treasury replied : "Suppose the customs upon 
teas were appropriated to pay annuities and the net produce di- 
rected to be kept distinct and apart from the other public revenue 

69 Ibid. 



302 Smith Coixege Studies in History 

for that purpose. In this case it is manifest that the sum of 
£382,981 2s. lOd. and not the sum of £441,063 2s. lOd. would be 
deemed the net produce applicable to the payment of such an- 
nuities. Examine the books of the customs, excise or salt offices, 
you will find that drawbacks are not included in the net produce 
of any revenue. Common sense indeed will teach us that the 
sum of money which never comes to the use of the public but is 
returned almost as soon as levied cannot with any propriety of 
language be called a net produce." 70 

The spirit of the act went against the company as well as the 
letter. It was evident that the public was in no event to be the 
loser, but was to receive, during the term of the act, the same in- 
come from tea, which, the quantities of tea sold continuing the 
same, it would have received had not the inland duties been dis- 
continued and had the drawback not been allowed. The test sum 
which was annually to be made good to the public was a fifth part 
of five years' receipts of money actually paid into the exchequer 
and never drawn back. 71 

The treasury pointed out further that it would be natural to 
expect the company during the time of the act not only to import 
an amount sufficient to supply the Irish and American markets 
for that time, but enough for some years to come, when the draw- 
backs would cease. The exportation would then be very small 
for a considerable time. "Suppose," they said, "that the draw- 
backs upon teas amount communibus annis to £50,000 a year and 
that in the four remaining years of the bargain there will be tea 
exported to answer the Irish and American demand for four 
years after the conclusion of it. In this case it is evident that, 
besides the loss of £50,000 a year after the drawback is resumed, 
they will, in the course of the next four years, suffer a 'diminu- 
tion of revenue to the amount of £400,000, if the company are 
permitted to enter their drawbacks into the annual account as net 
produce of the custom house duties." 72 



Ibid. (Treas. Sol. Papers. Bundle 3321), 

Ibid. 

Ibid. 



Trade: of the: Delaware: District 303 

It was also claimed that the East India Company defrauded 
the public considerably by contriving to change their date of sale. 
Before 1766 the company had always had two sales, September 
and March, and the annual revenue was £763,062 14?. lOd. When 
they learned or believed that the act of 7 Geo. Ill, c. 56, would be 
passed, they postponed the March sale to August. This made 
only one sale, in 1767, and caused the average to be computed 
from nine sales rather than ten. The company answered this 
charge by saying that the nine sales were larger than the ten dur- 
ing the five years before 1762, and that they were compelled to 
put the price very low in order to counteract the smuggling under 
high prices due to duties. 73 

During the year ending July 5th, 1768, the government suf- 
fered considerably by this arrangement. It had been agreed that 
£718,000 or thereabouts, was the average of all duties before the 
act. The immense quantity of tea put up for sale in that year, 
however low the prices were, furnished duties sufficient to make 
good to the government that sum and some hundred pounds over. 
Besides, the government had paid in drawbacks £58,000, and had 
received from the company toward that sum only £32,000. The 
deficiency on the whole from the average of the foreign duties 
was £26,000, but towards the deficiency the American duty of 3d. 
should be taken into account. Nevertheless the government suf- 
fered and at the same time the company had no deficiency to 
make good. At the end of the next year the company had to pay 
£142,000 to make up for the deficiency. The drawbacks were 
£67,000, but, after the deduction of the £32,000 due to the gov- 
ernment, there remained only £35,000. 

In 1770, the government lost £18,500. Nevertheless, during 
the three years the company had lost through the decrease in the 
price of tea £600,000, although legal consumption had increased 
two-fifths ; £185,000 had been paid for indemnification and the 
government was demanding £80,000 as the difference between 
the drawback and the annual £32,000. It was estimated that the 
company would be out £850,000 for three years, if the government 

73 Ibid. 



304 Smith Cou^ge; Studies in History 

won, while the government would not lose a shilling; if, on the 
other hand, the company succeeded, they would lose £785,000, and 
the government £80,000. In either case the experiment was a 
dear one. 

That was the state of affairs between the government and the 
East India Company at the close of 1770. Neither the company 
nor the government was satisfied, and matters did not mend dur- 
ing the next few years. The difficulty seemed to lie with 
the North American colonies. After the repeal of the duties 
on glass, painters' colors and lead, the disturbances subsided. For 
a time tea was imported, principally at Boston but the amount was 
so small that the government revenues were insignificant, and the 
company steadily lost money. The truth of the matter was that 
the colonists in general did not need to patronize the company, 
because they could supply themselves with tea smuggled from St. 
Eustatius or from Boston, where the merchants were not over 
conscientious in carrying out the non-importation agreement. 

Two attempts were made to satisfy all parties concerned. The 
first, in 1772, arranged that the company should pay £718,000 an- 
nually into the exchequer, since according to the treasury account 
the indemnification was never sufficient, and according to the 
company's table 74 the company more than indemnified the govern- 
ment. This arrangement did not aid in the American difficulties 
and the company was forced to store in English warehouses dur- 
ing that year 16,000,000 pounds of tea, at one shilling per pound, 
because of the discontent in the colonies. Such pressure was 
brought to bear upon the government that the company was al- 
lowed the privilege of importing tea directly into the colonies, 
duty free, on the condition that they would pay over to the gov- 
ernment a sum equivalent to the former duties. It was hoped 
that by this method the company would be able to increase their 
sales appreciably, and at the same time remove the friction be- 
tween the colonies and the mother country. 75 



74 
75 



cf. Tables, pp. 300-301. 

5 Treasury Solicitor Papers, Bundle, 3321. 

As it worked out through concessions to the East India Co., the colo- 
nists were paying less for their tea than people in England — See M. 
Farrand— The Taxation of Tea, 1767-1773, p. 269. 



Tradd of the: Delaware; District 305 

Shortly after the arrangement was made it became evident 
that the colonies were not going to accept it. They saw no differ- 
ence between paying the duty themselves and allowing the East 
India Company to pay it for them. Led on by this idea, they 
listened to those, who, for the sake of a principle, were anxious to 
thwart the plans of the government, and to those — and these were 
almost as numerous — who through fraudulent means were getting 
large profits by importing tea from Holland and Boston. 76 The 
latter class never lost an opportunity to keep up the fire of indig- 
nation against the government and the East India Company. 

The general character of the opposition to the tea act in Amer- 
ica and the especially vigorous measures adopted in Boston are 
familiar facts of history. We have only recently come to realize, 
however, the very important part played by the city of Philadel- 
phia. The publication of the lengthy correspondence of James 
and Drinker of Philadelphia, Pigon and Booth of London, and 
their branch in New York, proves almost conclusively, not only 
that the resistance originated in Philadelphia, but that the move- 
ment in other colonies was largely directed by the Philadelphia 
leaders. Moderate and without excessive ferment, they were able 
to prevent the landing of tea, although they allowed Captain Ayres 
to protest, and loaned him a sufficient amount to prepare for a 
return voyage. 77 

Thus it seems that the various acts passed during these ten 
years had, from the point of view of the ministry, an economic 
basis. The avowed purpose of the legislation from the beginning 
was to increase the revenue and in every instance the trade of the 
empire was the chief consideration. While it is true that some 
of the demands — for example, the sugar act — if enforced, would 
have impoverished certain parts of the empire and enriched oth- 
ers, that was more or less an incident in the general imperial 
scheme. The difficulties and embarrassments attending the 



76 Treasury Board Papers, I, 462. 

77 Bulletin of Friends' Historical Society of Philadelphia, Vol. II, No. 
3 and Vol. Ill, No. 1. 

Thomas B. Taylor, The Philadelphia Counterpart of the Boston Tea 
Party. 



306 Smith College Studies in History 

"enumerated" policy were no doubt recognized by those who 
made the demands, but to counteract the well organized system 
of smuggling there seemed to be no more effectual method than to 
make Great Britain the entrepot of the whole empire. On the 
other hand the resistance to the acts in the Delaware district can 
be defended on economic grounds. The very nature of the trade 
and the economic conditions of the district forbade any restric- 
tions on the West Indian trade. Although an economic pressure 
upon the trade is discernible only in the sugar and stamp acts, 
nevertheless the "enumerated" policy, which continued during the 
entire period except for a few alterations, was the chief cause of 
the later resistance. It would be impossible to explain except on 
political grounds the action taken towards the Townshend acts 
and tea acts. The non-importation agreements must be consid- 
ered as economic measures taken against the general policy re- 
flected in these acts, rather than against the acts themselves. 



CHAPTER III 

The: Effect of the British Legislation 

The numerous letters and pamphlets written by traders and 
colonists in disapproval of the ministerial program would lead one 
to conclude that the colonial trade was seriously hampered, that 
factories were erected in large numbers, that imports and exports 
rapidly decreased and that the high duties caused a great deal of 
hardship. There can be no doubt, however, that the evil results 
were greatly exaggerated. It is possible, by considering the state 
of manufactures, the custom house statistics of exports and im- 
ports, and the amount of smuggling during the period, to estimate 
roughly the real extent to which the legislation was effective. 

(1) Manufactures 

The state of manufactures in the colonies after 1763 is one of 
the best indications of the effect of the British legislation during 
this period. This is particularly true in the case of the Delaware 
district, whose traders were compelled to obtain British manu- 
factures though circuitous routes. Restrictions placed upon the 
trade with the West Indies and southern Europe affected their 
ability to import manufactures quite as much as duties upon goods 
imported directly from Great Britain. 

Before 1763, manufactures had gained little headway in the 
district. The small amount of woolen and linen produced was a 
sign of poverty. Most of the manufactures were of the house- 
hold type, the price of labour being so high that it was unprofit- 
able to establish factories. According to Dickinson, the situation 
had changed by 1765. He wrote to William Pitt in that year, 
"Thousands are now in these northern provinces raising flocks of 
sheep who never had any before ; the price of which animal and 
their wool have within two years increased upwards of 30%. 
Beef, pork, wheat and our other produce fall daily in their prices, 
because the merchants cannot ship these commodities to other 
markets as formerly, which greatly favors raising of sheep ; for 



308 Smith Coixsge Studies in History 

instead of fields of wheat, Indian corn, and grazing pastures for 
our cattle, most will in short time, if things continue as they are 
at present, be turned into sheep pastures. Fulling mills are erect- 
ing all over the country, dyers and other workmen are constantly 
arriving from home. It is the opinion of most people here that 
more woolen clothes have been made within the last two years 
than in twenty years together, which real necessity has set on 
foot. One thing that greatly encourages our manufactures in 
general is the lowness of wages of late, which are likely still to 
fall owing to the great scarcity of cash ; the main obstacle of our 
setting up manufactures formerly being the exorbitant price of 
labour." 1 

According to Bagnall, a linen manufactory was set up in 
Philadelphia in 1764. Hemp, flax and land were purchased for 
this purpose, and some nine hundred persons were employed. A 
plant of another kind was started by Daniel Mause two years 
later. He advertised in the Pennsylvania Gazette that he had 
lately erected a number of looms for the manufacture of thread 
and cotton stockings, and other kind of hosiery, "hoping the good 
people of this and neighboring provinces will encourage this his 
undertaking at a time when America calls for the endeavors of 
her sons ; and as the goodness of Pennsylvania made stockings is 
so well known and so universally esteemed, said Mause will work 
up thread, cotton, worsted, yarn, etc., in the best manner for the 
country gentlemen or others who may be pleased to employ him 
for a moderate satisfaction." 2 

These instances and a few more represent the efforts made in 
setting up manufactories in Pennsylvania after 1763. They were 
at best spasmodic and temporary. John Penn, writing on Janu- 
ary 27, 1767, said concerning manufactures in his province, "Very 
little encouragement is given to such schemes, nor do I know of 
any actually carrying out at this time except two. One of these 
was set up about three years ago in this city, by private subscrip- 



1 Chatham Papers, Bun. 97. Dec. 1765. Letters from John Dickinson. 

2 Bagnall, W. R., Textile Industries. 1789-1810, pp. 51-54. 
Pennsylvania Gazette, May 1, 1766. 



Trade of the; Delaware District 309 

tion, for the making of sail cloth, ticking and linens, but the per- 
sons concerned have already sunk money by their project; for the 
high price of labour will not allow any of the articles to be made 
at so cheap a rate as those of the same quality and goodness man- 
ufactured in England and sold by the retailer here. They have 
therefore lately resolved to discontinue that undertaking." 3 

Penn's report differed considerably from that just quoted 
from Dickinson. The discrepancy between them is partly ac- 
counted for when the purpose in each case is analyzed. Penn as an 
official would be anxious to give as favorable an account as possi- 
ble of his colony; while Dickinson, who strongly opposed the 
stamp and sugar acts was eager to give all of the facts their most 
gloomy aspect. Nevertheless, Dickinson wrote when two acts were 
in force which were considered by merchants to be pernicious to 
trade, and Penn's account came after the repeal of one and the 
partial repeal of the other. Taking all things into consideration, 
it seems that the legislation of 1763-1765 gave a little stimulus to 
manufactures in that it drained the district of specie and thus 
made it more difficult to get money for remittance to England. 
During the remaining years of this period manufacturing con- 
ditions remained about the same. There were spasmodic attempts 
to erect plants of various kinds, but the high price of labor, lack 
of capital and presence of free lands made manufacturing on a 
large scale unprofitable. 

The various attempts to establish manufactories naturally ac- 
companied a decrease in the importation of manufactures into the 
district. The merchants, in 1766, in giving evidence as to the 
inefficacy of the stamp act, claimed that there was a considerable 
decrease in manufactures sent from England. One house gave 
the following figures for manufactures sent to New England, 
New York and Pennsylvania : 

1763 £1,131,901 4s. 4d. 

1764 537,614 13 7 

1765 404,644 14 10 4 

3 C. O., 5 :1281, p. 69. John Penn sent anothre report with the same 
information on the 13 June, 1768. 

* Addit. Mss., 33030, f. 163. Examination of Merchants before the 
House of Lords, 1765. 



310 Smith Cou^ge Studies in History 

(2) Trade Statistics 

The export and import trade statistics between Great Britain 
and Philadelphia also show a decided fluctuation during the per- 
iod. From 1702 to 1763 there was a fairly steady increase in 
spite of the many wars. After 1763, when the time seemed pro- 
pitious for a great advancement of trade, the variation was not 
only greater than in the earlier period, but the high mark of 1760 
was never reached again in the colony of Pennsylvania. While 
it would be too much to assert that this was wholly due to the 
British trade legislation, the fact that a decrease occurs after cer- 
tain acts were passed indicates that the trade was affected by 
them. The greatest decrease of imports from England came dur- 
ing the years 1764-1766 and 1769-1770. 5 Reasons for the first 
instance may be found in the sugar act and stamp act, which cut 
off means for getting remittances more than any other acts. The 
second period covers the years in which the non-importation 
agreements were most effective. 

The first instance of a non-importation agreement was in 
1765. Soon after the stamp act congress, which presented the po- 
litical reasons why the act should be repealed, a paper containing 
six resolutions was passed around in Philadelphia from house to 
house and from store to store for signers. Among other things it 
was agreed that the subscribers should countermand all orders for 
British manufactures, unless they were articles which could be 
used in American manufactories, and that if goods were imported 
the sale of them should be prevented. 6 

It would be difficult to determine what force these resolutions 
exerted, as the closing of the harbors at Philadelphia between 
November 1st and December 1st accomplished their object. After 
the customs officers began to clear vessels without stamped paper 
the act was for all practical purposes null and void. 



5 See App. IV. 

6 Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss., An. 340. Non-importation agreement signed by 
the merchants in Philadelphia 25 Oct. 1765. According to the grandson 
of William Bradford, one of the principal factors in the movement, this 
paper was "the first public act in the country declaring resistance to the 
oppressive acts of the British crown." 



Trade: of the: Delaware: District 311 

No other concerted efforts were made until after the revenue 
act. In the meantime the quartering of troops in Boston, the ap- 
pointment of officers out of sympathy with the colonial trade, 
the suppression of the New York legislature, and the stationing of 
cutters in the harbors, had added to the flame kindled by the acts 
passed previous to 1766. On the passage of the revenue act and the 
establishment of the customs board, attempts were made to in- 
terest British merchants in the American distress. For this pur- 
pose associations of economy and non-importation of superflu- 
ities were formed in most of the northern colonies. 7 From a 
letter of New York merchants to merchants in Philadelphia, dated 
Sept. 1, 1768, it is evident that these attempts were of several 
months standing. 8 They referred to a previous invitation, given 
to Philadelphia merchants to enter an association of non-importa- 
tion, and complained that the scheme had fallen short because they 
had waited for the Philadelphia merchants to act. They consid- 
ered the time of year most propitious because of the spring or- 
ders, and were determined to proceed without the aid of Philadel- 
phia. 9 

The Philadelphia merchants were the last to enter the associa- 
tion. John Penn wrote in July, 1770, "The reasons, given by the 
merchants here for delaying to adopt the measures so long, were 
because they judged any such rash and untimely resolutions, in- 
stead of answering the purpose intended by them, would rather 
irritate the government against them and be the means of frus- 
trating the design of the petitions, which had been sent by the as- 
sembly of this province to the king and parliament, and there- 
fore they thought it most advisable to decline entering into any 



7 C. O., 5:1283, p. 67. 

8 Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss. Society of Collection Letters from New York 
Merchants. 

Broadsides A. B. 1, No. 129. Pa. Hist. Soc. This paper published 25 
April, 1768, shows that the Philadelphia merchants were also aroused 
early in the year. 

9 C. O., 5:1299. 

John Penn evidently refers to this letter in his correspondence with 
Lord Hillsborough, in 1770, when he wrote that attempts had been made 
as early as September, 1768. 



312 Smith College Studies in History 

agreement proposed by them, till they should know the success of 
these petitions. But afterwards, on hearing they were not likely 
to have the desired effect, they immediately joined heartily in the 
general association." 10 

The merchants of Philadelphia finally agreed on the 10th of 
March, 1769, that they would also restrict importation. The 
agreement varied in different colonies, but in general the follow- 
ing was accepted by all : 

(1) Nothing was to be imported which was taxed by parlia- 
ment for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, except pa- 
per not exceeding six shillings per ream and such articles as had 
already been ordered. 

(2) Enumerated goods were not to be imported. 

(3) Wines were not to be imported. 

(4) No ewe lambs that would be weaned before the first of 
May were to be killed. 

(5) If any enumerated goods were imported, importers, 
agents and managers were not to be allowed to make use of 
them. 

(6) Persons disobeying these articles were to be boycotted. 

(7) After the expiration of six months none of the enum- 
erated articles were to be imported from any other colony which 
had imported them from Great Britain. 

(8) No tradesman or merchant was to take advantage of the 
scarcity of these goods to enhance prices. 11 

When it was learned that the house of commons had agreed 
to pass a bill for the repeal of duties on paper, glass, painters' 
colors and lead, but that the duty on tea was to be continued, the 
merchants of Philadelphia had a general meeting to consider the 
best plan of conduct to be pursued. They desired to wait until 



10 C. O., 5:1299. Letter from John Penn to Lord Hillsborough, 1770. 
C. O., 5 :1300. Letter from Lord Hillsborough to John Penn in which 

he said "it would have redounded greatly to the honour of the merchants 
of Philadelphia, if they had kept to the resolution in which they so long 
persisted by declining any association against importation from Great 
Britain." See also Annual Register, 1765, p. 55. N. Y. Col. Doc, VII, 
pp. 799-800. 

11 C. O., 5:1282, Non-importation agreements. 



Trade of the; Delaware; District 313 

the 5th of June before taking any steps, that they might learn 
the sentiments of the merchants of the neighboring colonies and 
act in concert with them. On the 5th of June another meeting 
was held, and it was determined that there should be no altera- 
tion in the agreement which they had entered upon on the 10th 
of March, 1769. 12 

The feeling, which existed among the merchants of Philadel- 
phia at this time, is best shown in a letter written by James 
Drinker to his partner Abel James on the 29th of April, 1770. 
"I have heretofore mentioned to thee the restlessness and dissatis- 
faction of many of the importers under the present agreements ; 
the pretexts for such uneasiness have been that the burden was 
unequally borne. While the importers of wine, molasses, etc., 
were pursuing their trade to considerable advantage and paying 
large sums into the treasury for revenues raised out of those ar- 
ticles, the importers of British goods were standing still and sac- 
rificing all for the public good. That our agreement subjected us 
in many instances to hardships which the other colonies had in 
their agreement wisely guarded against. At Boston baize for 
fishermen was an excepted article. Maryland imports all coarse 
woolens at or under eight shillings per yard, and are running 
away with our trade for Indian goods and all others which that 
price will comprehend. Albany continues importing for their 
Indian trade; our Indians must be properly and reasonably sup- 
plied with clothing and other necessaries, which in our present 
circumstances, the traders must apply for to Maryland or Albany. 
That in the agreement formed on the 10 March, 1769, a great 
number of persons signed who were not importers, yet these by 
the tenor of the agreement, are to determine as to our trade and 
property, and have a vote in the altering, releasing and annulling 
the same. It is further urged that so far as we have tried the 
experiment, it has proved grievous to many, and that a number of 



12 C. O., 5:1300, Letter written by John Penn to Lord Hillsborough, 
September 5, 1770. 



314 Smith College Studies in History 

shopkeepers and importers, who have but small capitals, must 
sink under it if continued another season." 13 

In the spring of 1770 the non-importation agreements began 
to break. The repeal of the revenue act on April 12th, 1770, 
without the repeal of the duty on tea, caused a dissension among 
the American merchants regarding importation. On the 10th of 
May the principal merchants of Albany wrote to the merchants in 
New York thus : 

"We are desired by the merchants of this place to acquaint 
you that they have this day resolved to make null and void their 
articles of non-importation entered into last summer, and are 
agreed to import all sorts of merchandise from Great Britain as 
before the agreement of non-importation was entered into, except 
the article of tea which they have agreed not to import till the 
duty on the same shall be taken off. We hope our resolution 
may be approved of by the merchants and traders of your 
place." 14 

This news was received with disapprobation by some of the 
merchants in New York. Isaac Low wrote on the 26th of May 
to merchants in Philadelphia informing them of the action taken 
by the Albany merchants and expressing his astonishment at the 
"hasty and unwarrantable resolution," but he hoped that it would 
not influence any of the merchants of New York or Phila- 
delphia. 15 

It is quite evident, however, from a letter of Lieutenant Gov- 
ernor Colden to the Earl of Hillsborough, dated the 16th of May, 
that there were a number of merchants in New York, Philadel- 
phia and Boston who were likewise ready to give up the agree- 
ment. 

"The merchants in this place and in Philadelphia have under 
consideration, whether to import goods from Great Britain or not. 
I am told the majority both in this place and Philadelphia are 



13 Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 14, p. 42. 
Printed Correspondence of James Drinker to his partner Abel James. 

14 Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss. Society of Collection, Merchants' Letters. 

15 Ibid. 



Trade of the: Delaware District 315 

for importing, and that they will come to a determination in a 
few days. The party in opposition to the present administration 
join with the people of Boston in measures to prevent importa- 
tion and for that purpose stole late in the night last week a pro- 
cession of the mob to expose a Boston importer, who happened 
to come to this place. The magistrates knew nothing of the de- 
sign till it was too late, otherwise, I believe it would have been 
prevented. Tho' the parties are much exasperated against 
each other, I hope the public peace will be preserved, and the is- 
sue will be favourable to the government." 16 

Three weeks later, on the 7th of July, 1770, Colden again 
wrote to Hillsborough. This letter indicates a wide divergence of 
opinion existing between the merchants of Philadelphia and New 
York. He said, "Soon after it was known that the parliament 
had repealed the duties on paper, glass, etc., the merchants in 
this place sent to Philadelphia that they might unitedly agree to a 
general importation of everything except tea. They at first re- 
ceived a favourable answer, and their agreement to the proposal 
was not doubted ; but soon after a letter was received at Philadel- 
phia from a gentleman in England, in whom the Quakers in that 
place repose the greatest confidence, advising them to persist in 
non-importation, till every internal taxation was taken off; this 
changed the measures of Philadelphia ; but the principal inhabi- 
tants of this place continue resolved to show their gratitude for 
the regard the parliament has in removing the grievances they 
complained of. As there still remains a restless faction, who from 
popular arguments, rumours and invectives, are endeavouring to 
excite riots and opposition among the lower class of people a num- 
ber of gentlemen went round the town to take the sentiments of 
the individuals. I am told that 1180, among which are the prin- 
cipal inhabitants, declared for importation, about 300 were neutral 
or unwilling to declare their sentiments, and a few of any dis- 
tinction declared in opposition to it. I am informed likewise 
that the merchants of this place resolved to acquaint the mer- 



18 N. Y. Col. Doc, Vol. VIII, pp. 214-5. 
6 



316 Smith College Studies in History 

chants of Boston and Philadelphia with their inclination to im- 
port." 17 

The "gentleman in England," referred to, was, in all proba- 
bility, Benjamin Franklin, who was in England at that time. A 
letter from him as agent for Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, 
written on the 18th of March, 1770, to a correspondent in Amer- 
ica, concluded with this remark : "In short it appears to me, 
that if we do not now persist in this measure until it has had its 
full effect, it can never again be used on any future occasion with 
the least prospect of success, and that if we do persist another 
year we shall never afterwards have occasion to use it." 16 

It is impossible to determine whether or not the decision to 
retain the non-importation agreement in Philadelphia was influ- 
enced by this letter. It is certain, however, that after receiving 
word from New York that a majority of the merchants there had 
resolved to import everything, except tea and other articles on 
which duties might subsequently be imposed, 19 the inhabitants of 
Philadelphia, the suburbs and a great number from the country, 
met in the State House and adopted the following resolutions : 

"1: That the non-importation agreement entered into by the 
merchants and traders of the colonies is a safe, peaceable and 
constitutional way of asserting our rights and, if persisted in, 
there is reason to believe it will produce the desired effect, and 
therefore ought to be considered as a bulwark of our liberty. 

"2. That good effect depends upon perseverance and that 
strength consists of union. 

"3. That a breach of the agreement at present cannot be owing 
to any want of real necessaries, especially in the northern colonies, 
and that the partial repeal of the American revenue act is no just 
foundation for deviating from the agreement entered into ; as 
the claim of right to tax us without our consent is still kept up 
and the duty on tea retained as a test of that right. 



"Ibid., p. 217. 

18 Smyth, Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. V, p. 254. 

19 Pa. Hist. Soc. Mss. Society of Collection, Letter from Isaac Low and 
others in N. Y., 26 May, 1770. 



Trade: of the Delaware District 317 

"4. That the alteration adopted by a majority of the inhabi- 
tants of the city of New York is a sordid and wanton defection 
from the common cause, and that by that defection they have, as 
much as in them lies, weakened the public character of America, 
strengthened the hands of our enemies, and encouraged them to 
prosecute their designs against our common liberty. 

"5. That all the bad consequences that may ensue to the lib- 
erties of America by their defection are chargeable upon a pre- 
vailing faction in New York. 

"6. That as a testimony to the world of our disapprobation of 
the late measures adopted by that prevailing faction we will 
break off all commercial intercourse with New York, so far as 
not to purchase of any of the inhabitants of the colony of New 
York any goods except alkaline, salts, skins, furs, flax and hemp, 
until they return to their agreement or until the act of 7 Geo. 
Ill is totally repealed. And we pledge ourselves each to the 
others that if we know of any person attempting to bring into 
this city or province any goods from New York except these 
above enumerated, that we will immediately give information of 
them to the merchants' committee, that their names may be pub- 
lished in the newspapers, provided always that every inhabitant 
of this place, town and province, who has effects at New York, 
may have the liberty to remove them from thence, provided it is 
done within six weeks from this date." 20 

The chief advantage of these agreements was that they helped 
to make the complaints of the merchants against the revenue act 
more effective. So far as actually diminishing the revenue was 
concerned, they did not accomplish much, owing to the fact that 
they were frequently violated. They had scarcely any effect in 
Boston and Rhode Island, where merchants made little effort to 
conceal the fact that they imported manufactures from Great 
Britain. In Philadelphia the association held out the longest, 
and statistics show considerable diminution of trade ; but even 
here the method of procedure was found to be impossible, on 



20 C. O., 5 :1300. Inclosure dated 19 July, 1770, in a letter from John 
Penn to Lord Hillsborough. 



318 Smith College: Studies in History 

account of non-enforcement in other colonies and the overpower- 
ing commercial interests of the people. The great increase of 
imports, in 1771, indicates that the agreements had become a dead 
letter in Philadelphia. 21 

While the statistics show a decrease in certain years in all 
manufactured articles imported from Great Britain, except ne- 
cessities, the trade in other channels seems little affected. The 
amount of molasses legally imported was less in 1765, 22 but other- 
wise the West India trade did not appreciably change. With the 
exception of the one year, 1769, the tonnage in all the channels 
of trade does not vary 23 in a marked degree. 

The comparatively slight deviation in the trade statistics is not, 
however, a proof that the trade of the district did not suffer from 
the legislation. After the close of the Anglo-French struggles, 
when the freedom of the seas was much greater, trade should 
have increased rapidly in every part of the empire. Furthermore, 
in determining the effect of the legislation upon trade in the Dela- 
ware district, the failure of the grain crop in Europe must be 
taken into account. The first important demand for American 
wheat was made in the autumn of 1765 and 1766. James Tilgh- 
man wrote to Thomas Penn on the 10th of November, 1766 — "I 
believe you will have a very great receipt of money this year. 
The European demand for our produce is a very favorable cir- 
cumstance." 24 

The merchants of London who traded with North America 
felt this situation keenly. At one of their meetings held on the 
31st of October, 1766, they drew up the following memorial 
which states clearly the condition both in Europe and America : 



21 Appendix IV. 

22 T., I, 505. 

The revenue collected in Pennsylvania from the duty on molasses was 
also less in 1765 than it was for the two preceding years : 

1763 £165 0s. Od. 

1764 1,576 12 6 

1765 91 5 

23 Customs, 16:1. Tables of the West Indian, the Southern European 
and the Wine Island trade. 

24 Pa. Hist. Mss., Vol. X. 



Trade of the: Delaware; District 319 

"That effectual relief may be obtained by a speedy importa- 
tion of wheat and flour from the continent of America, where the 
crops this year have been remarkably plentiful and the grain par- 
ticularly good in quality. 

"That from the latest advices from that side, 28th ult. Phil- 
adelphia, the best wheat might have been purchased and im- 
ported into this kingdom at or under 33 shillings per quarter in 
which computation are included, commission for purchasing, 
charges of shipping, insurance, freight, tonnage and port charge. 

"That although the price in America may probably advance 
"by the orders which are sent thither for the supply of Italy, there 
is, nevertheless, great reason to believe it may be purchased in 
America on lower terms than in any part of Europe. 

"That for these considerations the undermentioned persons 
do agree to subscribe the several sums set against their names 
for the purpose of importing wheat and flour from America. 

"That a call pro rata, be made on the subscribers as often as 
money is wanted. 

"That three vessels be chartered and sail directly for this 
purpose. 

"That orders be forwarded by them and several others for 
the earliest conveyances for purchasing wheat and flour in 
America, that such a number of vessels be chartered there as may 
be thought proper. 

"That the vessels shall be engaged to touch at Falmouth for 
orders where to proceed to a port of discharge. 

"That in case the ports of England are opened by govern- 
ment for the admission of grain from the British plantations, the 
said vessels shall be ordered to such ports of the kingdom as shall 
appear from the best intelligences to be in the greatest want of 
bread-corn. 

"That all the grain imported shall be sold for the benefit of 
the manufacturers, mechanics and laborious poor without any 
profit to the subscribers whatsoever. 

"That in case the ports of Great Britain should not be opened 
for the admission of grain from the British plantations, the said 



320 Smith Coixege Studies in History 

ships shall be ordered to such markets as may appear to be the 
most advantageous to the subscribers." 25 

In 1767, the situation was such that wheat was imported from 
the continent of Europe free of duty, 26 and in the next year an 
act was found which permitted the importation of wheat from the 
colonies free of duty. The poor harvests in Europe, during the 
years 1767, 1769, 1771, made it necessary to continue this act. 
Thus the abnormal demand came at an opportune time and helped 
to counteract the difficulties incident to the enumerated policy. 

(3) Illicit Trade After 1763 

Statistics are, after all, very ineffective in measuring the 
amount of trade under a highly protective system. Smuggling 
was so prevalent that when allowances have been made for all 
the vessels which never entered, and the undervaluation of goods 
which were legally imported, the accounts of the custom officials 
assume little importance. Consequently the state of illicit trade 
would be a better indication of the effects of the British legisla- 
tion, especially upon the trade of this district, than either the 
number of new manufactures or the fluctuations of the amount 
turned into the exchequer. One of the chief aims of the new acts 
was the prevention of illicit trade. The government hoped to 
secure as much by that means as by the new export and import 
duties, at least enough to pay for the various colonial establish- 
ments. With all the carefully worked out details of the new 
regulation there remained some defects to which the failure of 
executing the laws may be partially attributed. Among these, one 
of the most noticeable was the small number of authorized land- 
ing places. This was a great handicap in the enforcement of such 
clauses as the one in the act of 7 Geo. Ill, c. 46, which provided 
"that from, and after, the 20th of November, 1767, the master or 
other persons having or taking the charge or command of every 
ship or vessel arriving in any British colony or plantation in 
America shall before he proceeds with his vessel to the place of 



Chatham Papers, Bun. 97. 31 Oct., 1766. Merchants' Proposal. 
7 Geo. Ill, c. 4-11. 



Trade: of the: Delaware: District 321 

unloading, come directly to the custom house for the port, or dis- 
trict where he arrives, and make a just and true entry upon oath 
before the collector or comptroller or other principal officers of the 
customs there, of the burthen, contents and lading of such sloop 
or vessel." 27 It was almost impossible to carry this out, because 
there were numerous harbors and places without customs offi- 
ces, where vessels were fitted out and to which they returned to 
unload and discharge. On one occasion the following questions 
were asked : 

1. "Must a master bring his vessel to a port or district where 
there is a customs house, and may the officers of the customs re- 
fuse to admit him to an entry if he does not bring the vessel? 

Ans. 'Not necessary to bring the vessel in, but the master 
must apply for admittance before unloading.' 

2. "Do these regulations hold for coastwise shipping? 
Ans. 'No. Only for foreign shipping.' " 

In the first place, supposing a trader was dishonest enough to 
carry on illicit trade, it is almost inconceivable that he would 
cease to be dishonest at the port of entry, when chances were few 
that a false cocket would be detected. Secondly, if the trader 
had acted according to the letter of the law and successfully 
evaded the detection of the customs officials, he was able to pro- 
ceed in landing the contraband goods with little difficulty. 28 On 
the other hand, if there had been officers at the principal landing 
places to search the vessel carefully, the trader would no doubt 
have been less courageous in his dishonest pursuits. 29 

Duncan Stuart, writing to Thos. Bradshaw on the 13th of 
February, 1769, from New London, made this point very clear. 
He said, "The amount of duties collected in one year was 
£319 3s. 2d. The smallness is owing to several vessels belonging 



27 T., I, 463. 

7 Geo. Ill, c. 46. 
cf. Chap. I. 

28 T., I, 463. The interpretation of this clause also rendered it useless. 

29 T., I, 400. On another occasion it was remarked that places existed 
where there were few outdoor officers, and in such places the indoor 
officers trusted entirely to the report of the master. 



322 Smith Cou^ge Studies in History 

to this district having entered their cargoes at Boston, New York 
and Philadelphia, but there is no doubt with me that it is in great 
measure owing to a great many goods being run, an evil that in 
my humble opinion can never effectually be prevented, unless sea 
vessels (whose burthern ought to be at least 70 tons) are obliged 
by law to unload at particular quays. But as long as vessels are 
allowed to land their cargoes at the distance of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 
miles from the custom house, business is and must be carried on 
in a very loose manner, and all endeavors to check it are in 
vain." 30 

The opinion of Jonathan Sewall, attorney-general of Massa- 
chusetts Bay, given on the same date, is worth considering as it 
applies to the Delaware district as much as to Massachusetts. He 
believed "that England should appoint officers at one or more 
ports in every province, but the boundaries of few or none of the 
ports have been ascertained by any authority whatsoever. Trade 
not being confined to the places where the officers reside but 
being carried on at places convenient to the merchants, vessels 
with dutiable goods often arrive at points remote, the master 
proceeds by land and makes report and entries at the customs 
house and often never comes near the customs house at all, and as 
little credit can be given to the report and entry, the revenue is 
often defrauded and gives opportunity to the merchants to run 
any part of the cargo with impunity." 13 Soon after this an in- 
vestigation was made concerning the towns, districts and ports of 
America, but nothing was done towards improving the condi- 
tions. 32 

The fee system was another fault, which had been only par- 
tially corrected, when salaries were given to the chief officer of 
the vice-admiralty. Although a fee was defined by law as a "gra- 
tuity given to an officer over and above his salary to excite him to 
a diligent performance of his duty," 33 it meant a dependence 



30 T., I, 399, Feb, 1769. 

31 Ibid. 

32 Cf. Chap. I, p. 244, note 10. Addit. Mss., 15484. 

33 C. O., 5:1273, Act regulating fees for custom-house officers. 
T., I, 471. Nov. 14, 1767. 



Trade: of the; Dexaware; District 323 

because the salaries were very small. The officers under a highly 
protective system were either aiding in the illicit trade by granting 
false certificates, or they were in danger of suffering from in- 
sufficient fees. 

The amount of fees was ascertained in three different ways, 
by act of parliament, by custom, and by verdict of jury. At- 
tempts were made, in 1765, to determine fees by law. The clause 
which concerns the customs house fees opens with the words 
"and in order to prevent any disputes concerning what fees the 
officers of His Majesty's customs in the British colonies or planta- 
tions in America may be entitled to for making entries or other 
business done by them in the execution of their employment." 
The fact that a table of fes was not given proves that it was to 
stand upon no positive law or authority. The law merely states 
that they should receive the same fees as their predecessors, un- 
less they were exorbitant or contrary to an act of parliament. 

The fees generally taken by the naval officer at Philadelphia 
were: 

Entering and clearing vessel £1 7 s. Od. 

Bill of health if required 6 

Making a bond for enumerated goods 5 

Certificate for cancelling such bond 5 

Certificate for taking naval stores to Great 

Britain 5 

For Governor's let passes for vessels above 

60 tons 12 

For Governor's let passes for vessels under 

60 tons 10 34 

The fees of the collector and comptroller, the only other 

officers who received fees, were : 

Collector Comptroller 

Entering and clearing vessels £1 7s. Od. £0 9s. Od. 

Bill of health if required 6 2 

Certificate for cancelling bond 5 10 

Register and recording the same 14 

General permit for goods shipped on 

board in shallop 2 



T., I, 482, 7 Mar., 1771. List of fees. 



324 Smith CoixSge Studies in History 

Collector Comptroller 

Port entry £0 5^. Od. 

Bill of stores 2 6 

Certificate for Great Britain 5 £0 Is. 8d. 

Certificate for naval stores 5 

There is a wide discrepancy in the accounts concerning the 
officers 35 in the Delaware district and their relations with the 
traders. John Penn, in transmitting the above lists of fees to 
John Robinson, a member of the customs board at Boston, re- 
marked, "The collector informs me that the merchants of this port 
have always cheerfully paid the fees expressed in the list, ex- 
cept that about twelve months ago, a number of them objected to 
some part of them in which, upon a conference with him on the 
subject, they afterwards acquiesced and have ever since paid 
them." 36 

This report indicates harmonious relations between the cus- 
toms officers and the traders. Nevertheless, it should not be 
taken too literally. Letters from governors of different pro- 
vinces show that the home authorities were continually getting 
word from the merchants that there were many obstructions in the 
way of customs officers exerting their duties, and yet the gov- 
ernors seemed incapable of assisting them in time to be of any 
use. Often they reported that they had heard of none in their re- 
spective colonies. A correspondence between Lord Hillsborough 
and the proprietors of Pennsylvania shows to what extent ob- 
structions at Philadelphia were known, or perhaps it would be 
more accurate to say, reported by the governor of Pennsylvania. 
Hillsborough wrote on the 19th of July, 1771, to the proprietors 
of Pennsylvania: "The lord commissioners of His Majesty's 
treasury have communicated to me several papers, received from 
the commissioners of customs in America relative to certain out- 
rages committed on their officers, and the neglect of the governor 
and civil magistrates in giving them assistance and protection, 
and their lordships have desired that I would take such measures 



T., I, 482, 1 Feb., 1771. 

C. O., 5:1300, Report of John Penn. 



Trade: of the; Delaware; District 325 

as I shall judge most expedient, to prevent in such governors 
and civil magistrates the like neglect of their duty for the future. 

"From these papers it appears that some of the most violent 
of these outrages have been committed in the city of Philadelphia, 
particularly in the months of April and October, 1769, on occasion 
of lawful seizures made by the officers of the customs, when such 
seizures were rescued by force and violence, and the officers and 
those from whom they received information of breaches of the 
law were treated with the greatest cruelty and inhumanity in the 
presence of the magistrate who gave them no assistance. It has 
given me great concern to find such acts of violence and inhu- 
manity in a colony, from which I have received such strong pro- 
fessions of loyalty and duty to the king, and in a city hitherto 
deservedly commended for the regularity of its government." 37 

When John Penn was informed concerning this letter, he wrote 
in a very characteristic manner that he regretted extremely these 
acts of violence, but he assured Hillsborough that the complaints 
were unfairly represented, that officers had nothing of which to 
complain, and that the colony was among the first in loyalty to 
the king. The latter part of his letter is in itself an admission of 
unsatisfactory trade conditions in the district. He said that it 
was almost impossible to prevent mob outrages, and that the back- 
wardness of the people to become informers added to the diffi- 
culty of prosecuting the leaders. 38 

The affair of October, 1769, may stand on its own merits. 
Mr. Swift, the collector of Philadelphia, was informed that 39 
pipes and 10 quarter casks of Fayal wine had been landed without 
paying duty. When the informer was discovered, he was tarred 
and feathered and dragged over stones. The magistrates took no 
notice of this. In the trial they put the blame on the collector 
and said that he had been bribed, but the collector denied the 
charge, and stated that he had told the informer that he would 



37 C. O., 5 :1284, Letter from Lord Hillsborough to the Proprietors of 
Pennsylvania, 19 July, 1771. 

38 Ibid., Letter of John Penn to Hillsborough, 24 Dec, 1171. Also in 
C. O., 5:1300. 



326 Smith Coixege Studies in History 

pay him 10s. per pipe in case the seizure was made. When the 
people heard this they were incensed and threatened Mr. Swift 
himself, who, fearing that the king's money might be in danger, 
turned over to the cashier of the port £1,186 18^. 14d. sterling, 
endorsed by Mr. Meredith, the wealthiest merchant in Phil- 
adelphia. Supposing that the facts in this case were true, and 
there is every probability that they were, several deductions might 
be drawn from them in the light of the correspondence just men- 
tioned. In the first place, it is evident that there was consider- 
able friction between the customs officials and the people as well 
as the traders. Secondly, when a case came up which was so 
obvious that the collector could scarcely let it pass and maintain 
even the appearance of doing his duty, the results were so pain- 
ful that there was little incentive to repeat the effort. Duncan 
Stuart was thoroughly justified when he said, "If I make a seiz- 
ure the stores are broken open, the goods are taken away, and 
woe to him that would make a discovery." Thirdly, when such a 
case came up and outrages were committed, the governor passed 
over the incident in his reports as of little importance and said 
that his people were free from any "illegalities" and "offered no 
obstructions to trade." 39 

A case arose, between 1770 and 1772, which is illustrative of 
the difficulties experienced by the collectors when they attempted 
to make seizures. 40 John Hatton was the collector at Salem and 
Cohensey in 1770. It was actually known by him that ships were 
arriving, and that pilot boats were unloading, and secreting con- 
traband goods, before the vessels made a formal entry. Every 
attempt to make a seizure was met with violence, and he received 
no assistance from the officers and magistrates, who were them- 
selves helpers, because the people sanctioned the smuggling. On 
one occasion, the 8th of November, 1770, Hatton seized a pilot 
boat off Cape May, which was laden with contraband goods from 



39 T., I, 471, 24 Oct., 1769. 

40 The Case of John Hatton. T., 482, Dec. 25, 1770; T., 491, Jan. 17, 
1771. 



Trade of the Delaware District 327 

the Prince of Wales. While doing this he was violently assaulted 
by a number of armed men from the Prince of Wales, who took 
the pilot boat out of his possession and robbed and dangerously 
wounded him, his son, and others on board with him. 41 His 
slave was taken prisoner and a little later, on land, his son was 
asaulted a second time, when, in company with the son of John 
Swift, he was attempting to find the pilot boat. 42 Hatton pro- 
tested to the governor of New Jersey, and a month later wrote to 
the commissioners of the customs at Boston that he had been most 
basely treated while performing his duty. He also said that he 
was well informed that a set of merchants at Philadelphia had 
given a considerable amount of money to officers of the province, 
in order to gain any point they wished, and that they had made 
the Cape their "staunch store" for contraband goods. 

Although the governor issued a proclamation for the arrest of 
the nine men who were supposed to be involved in the affair, 
nothing was really accomplished. One of the principal offenders, 
a man by the name of Hughes, was imprisoned, but, owing to the 
fact that he was a nephew of one of the justices, he was almost 
immediately released on bail. On the whole, the proclamation 
was a very perfunctory proceeding on the part of the governor, 
who did all he could a little later to injure Hatton in a communi- 
cation to the board of customs at Boston. On the 10th of April, 
1771, he wrote that Hatton had a violent temper, was arrogant, 
and threatened to make unfavorable reports of officers who did 
not strictly obey his instructions. 43 He charged him with com- 
plicity with the worst smugglers in Philadelphia, saying that no 
doubt Mr. Hatton would have made no mention of illicit trade if 
the seamen had offered him money. The governor said that Hat- 
ton had been "guilty of unwarranted practices in his office and 
had given encouragement and assistance to the most noted smug- 
glers to a great detriment of the king's revenues, notwithstanding 
which you have suffered him to continue in office and have not, 



41 T., I, 491, 17 Jan., 1771. 

42 T., 1,476. 

43 T., I, 491, 10 April, 1771. 






328 Smith College; Studies in History 

at least as I can learn, even shown any marks of your disapproba- 
tion of his conduct. Had I not known that the inspector general, 
after a strict examination into the matter, had made such a report 
to you, I should myself have suspended Hatton from acting in his 
office till further orders from proper authority. But as you were 
made fully acquainted with his conduct and it was a matter over 
which you had particular superintendency, I was unwilling to 
interfere, more especially as I had a right to expect that you 
would have thought yourself in duty bound after receiving such 
information to remove him from his office in the customs." 44 

No aid whatever was given in the Prince of Wales case by 
the collectors in the other ports of the district. Mr. Hatton com- 
plained that the collector at Burlington, Mr. Read, always inter- 
fered with the exercise of his duties. Since Read was one of the 
three chief justices of the province, for which position he received 
a salary from the assembly, it was more to his interest to consider 
the wishes of the people than to perform his duty as collector. 
The officers at Philadelphia excused themselves by saying that 
it seemed none of their business, since the vessel had a proper 
clearance and entry. An entry had been made at Philadelphia on 
the 10th of November that Brennen and Postlethwaite had shipped 
7,188 bushels of white salt and 24 chaldrons of coal from Liver- 
pool to Philadelphia in the Prince of Wales. 45 

The case came up again and again. It was discussed in the 
several courts and ordered out of first one and then another. Mr. 
Kemper, one of the judges of the civil courts, said that it was a 
matter of prudence rather than of law as to how far he should 
proceed. Andrew Allen, the attorney-general of Pennsylvania, 
decided that the case could not be tried in the ordinary courts 
except on the grounds of personal injury. In that capacity re- 
dress from one or all the offenders could be obtained. He also 
pointed out difficulties in bringing the case up in the vice-ad- 
miralty courts. So far as breaches of the laws of trade were 
concerned, they could undoubtedly be tried in that court, but only 



"Ibid. 

45 T., I, 476. 



Trade of the Delaware District 329 

if suit were brought within the year. As it was then the 28th of 
October, 1771, there was little time before the expiration of the 
year. As to the damages, he said "The different judges that have 
for many years past presided in the courts of the vice-admiralty 
here, who have also been gentlemen of high repute in law, have 
invariably laid it down as a rule not to determine any suit, which 
have sounded merely in damages without calling in the assistance 
of a jury to ascertain the quantum of damages." 46 

The result was that Hatton did not succeed in winning a single 
point. It is little wonder that few cases came up in these courts, 
when one so obvious as this, with the facts not disproved, could 
do nothing more than bring odium upon the collector. In the 
reform of the vice-admiralty it was expressly stipulated that it 
should have complete jurisdiction over all matters concerning 
seizures, and it was contrary to the purpose of the reform that 
there should be any difficulty in obtaining a hearing. Instead of 
hearing fewer cases it was supposed to have cognizance over 
more. 

The chief reason for this state of affairs was again the lack 
of salaries. The officers below the judge in each court were com- 
pelled to engage in other pursuits, and thus they were dependent 
upon the people. This defect was particularly noticeable after 
the discontent in the colonies became so marked. The officers did 
not dare to consider cases contrary to the wishes of the people, 
upon whom they were dependent for their livelihood. Richard 
Reeves, one of the commissioners at Boston, wrote on the 25th of 
August, 1772, to John Robinson, a member of the London cus- 
toms board, concerning the apathetic condition of the vice-ad- 
miralty court in the Delaware district. He said that the attorney- 
general of Pennsylvania had refused to undertake any prosecu- 
cutions for penalties incurred by persons aiding in the running of 
goods, and that there was neither solicitor nor advocate general 
in Philadelphia. In order to explain the position of the attorney- 
general, he inclosed a letter from the collector of Philadelphia, 
dated the 7th of the preceding June : "Upon several seizures 

48 T., I, 471. 



330 Smith Cou.Ege Studies in History 

lately made here we have frequently applied to the attorney gen- 
eral to prosecute for penalties incurred, and on finding his neg- 
lect therein, we thought proper to demand of him a reason, and 
his direct answer whether or not he would do it, to which he has 
replied (after taking a long time to consider it) that, as he had 
no salary from the crown to make him independent, he could by 
no means undertake any prosecutions of that kind which would 
injure him greatly in his business as a lawyer, and therefore he 
must beg leave to decline it. We are informed that all the law- 
yers here have combined not to undertake any of the like prosecu- 
tions. Indeed we have been told, whoever did, would meet a 
worse fate than ever the informers have done. This being the 
case, we hope the board will not impute it to any neglect of duty 
or inattention to their commands that those prosecutions have not 
been instituted." 47 

This letter is sufficient to show that only a few of the many 
cases of smuggling ever reached the vice-admiralty court. As an 
example of their decision upon cases which did come up, that of 
the sloop Ruby may be given. On the 30th of July, 1772, the col- 
lector and the comptroller informed the board that they had made 
a seizure of the Ruby from Cape Nicola Mole, for trading with- 
out a register. The sloop contained 134 casks of molasses from 
Hispaniola, worth \6d. per gallon, or £999 5s. 4d. The vessel was 
navigated chiefly by foreigners and the property itself was for- 
eign. About a month later, the collector and the comptroller is- 
sued a writ of delivery for the vessel and goods. 48 As instances 
of this kind had happened many times, and as such practices (ex- 
cept cases allowed by 14 Chas. II, eh. II, sec. 30) were very detri- 
mental to the revenue and a great discouragement to the officer, 
it was thought that the case was of prime importance. 

The case came up in the court of vice-admiralty and was prose- 
cuted by James Biddle, the deputy judge of the court. The ver- 
dict went against the officers of the customs, and the sloop with 



47 T., I, 491, Letter of Richard Reeves to John Robinson, 25 Aug., 
1772 with enclosure. 

"Ibid., Letter of Richard Reeves. 17 Sept., 1772. 



Trade of the Delaware District 331 

her cargo was returned to the owner, Emmanuel Roderick. The 
collector and the comptroller objected strenuously to the decision 
but with no avail. This Emmanuel Roderick claimed to be a resi- 
dent of Rhode Island, but it could not be proved that he had been 
naturalized. He said that he took a cargo to Hispaniola in a ves- 
sel called the Hopestill, which was entirely owned by him, was 
English manned, and was built in Rhode Island. In return for 
the cargo he purchased from this island 134 casks of molasses. 
Before his return he discovered at the port of Limberg in the 
same island that his vessel would not stand a return voyage. He 
then sold it much to his loss, and waited for an English vessel, 
but as no English vessel came and he was afraid that his molasses 
would spoil, he finally bought the sloop Ruby which had been 
built and registered in Virginia, although the register was lost. 
As many of his seamen had left the island, only the master and a 
few negroes being left, and as no Englishmen were available, he 
was obliged to man the sloop with foreigners. He had no in- 
tention of smuggling, but meant to explain all of this at Philadel- 
phia, obtain a new register for the sloop, and pay the duty on 
foreign molasses. 49 

Roderick's defense is plausible, but extremely improbable. At 
a time when almost every other man was a smuggler or interested 
in smuggling, it would be necessary to prove more conclusively 
every part of his story than to have his oath. He knew what 
risks were involved and should have been willing to suffer the 
consequences. If such instances were allowed to go unpunished, 
it was impossible to put any effective check upon illicit trade. The 
case is particularly suspicious in that the vessel came from His- 
paniola. This island, especially Cape Nicola Mole, was, as in the 
earlier period, a notorious smuggling center. Almost every ves- 
sel, which went to Jamaica laden with provisions and lumber, 
cleared for Cape Nicola Mole to purchase a cargo of sugar, coffee 
and molasses, with the money which they received from the Ja- 
maica merchants. It was also one of the bases for European 



19 T., I, 491, 10 Aug., Claim and Answer of Emmanuel Roderick. 

7 



332 Smith Coixege Studies in History 

manufactured goods during the time when merchants were at- 
tempting to do without manufactures imported via England. 50 

In fact, in every route the regulations and laws were increas- 
ingly disregarded. Trade continued, as before, to follow the 
natural channel, and for all practical purposes this district en- 
joyed free trade. This condition of affairs was clearly brought 
out in a report on a bill for regulating the trade in North Am- 
erica in 1773. It was urged that greater care should be taken to 
compel owners of provincial built ships to register them, to com- 
pel vessels to be brought into port for examination and to require 
greater discrimination in seizures on the part of the officers, so 
that the fair trader would not be discouraged. In the latter part 
of the report, however, which stated the grievances of the offi- 
cers, the reasons why the trade legislation had been such a fail- 
ure are fully explained. The officers complained, (1) that the 
heavy charges of the provincial courts of the admiralty kept many 
cases from being tried, the expense of prosecution of petty seiz- 
ures often being a greater charge than the goods; (2) that com- 
bination among the people prevented the sale of goods which were 
seized, in order that the smuggler could buy them in again at a 
low rate; (3) that there were very few crown lawyers in some 
ports, and that little assistance was given by those who were there, 
because they had no salaries. 



50 C. O., 5:119, 6 May, 1773, Letter from G. B. Rodney to Phillip 
Stephens. 



CONCLUSION 

There is little doubt that the legislation which has been dis- 
cussed was an economic necessity from the point of view of the 
empire, but it is equally true that it was economically untenable 
in the Delaware district. As has been pointed out, the trade of 
this district depended upon circuitous routes which were prac- 
tically forbidden by the "enumerated policy." In order to carry 
on trade with any advantage after the enactment of the legislation, 
the merchants and traders were compelled to resort to illegal 
methods on a much larger scale than ever before. This was, 
however, not a protest against protection per se, because the dis- 
trict itself was committed to that principle. It was merely a pro- 
test against this particular form of imperial protection. As the 
political controversies superseded the economic, illicit trade was 
condoned by all except the few appointees who were financially 
interested in enforcing the law. The result was that the authority 
of the vice-admiralty courts and custom houses of the district was 
completely nullified, and such conditions of free trade existed as 
to make the period for the individual traders more prosperous 
than any previous one. On the other hand, the British govern- 
ment had expended large sums to reorganize the protective sys- 
tem with the expectation of increasing the revenue by more ade- 
quate restrictions. When, therefore, the regulations became in- 
effectual through illicit trade, the government's loss of revenue 
was tremendous, and the increased expenditure for equipment 
proved to be a worthless experiment. Compelled to yield one 
point after another, the government finally realized that it would 
have to abandon the protective policy altogether, or enforce its 
laws by militant methods. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 



MANUSCRIPTS 

A. Public Record Office, London, England. 

I. Admiralty Office Papers. 

a. Class I. In Letters. 

1. Letters from the British Consuls, Bundle 3837. 

2. Letters from the Custom House, Bundle 3866. 

b. Class II. Out Letters. 

1. Letters relating to the Admiralty and Vice- 
Admiralty courts, Bundle 1057. 

II. Audit Office Papers. 

a. Accounts Various, Bundle 1391. 

III. Chatham Papers, Bundles 97 and 343. 

VI. Colonial Office Papers. 

a. Class V. Original Documents, Bundles 38:67; 112:- 

221:511; 573; 710; 851; 1133; 1228*; 1233*; 1263*; 
1265*-1268*; 1270*; 1273*; 1275*; 1277*; 1280*; 
1284*; 1288*-1292; 1299*; 1300*; 1499*. 

b. Class XXXIII. Shipping Returns from Barbadoes, 

Bundle 17. 

c. Class LXXVI. Shipping Returns from Dominica, 

Bundle 4. 

d. Class CXLH. Shipping Returns from Jamaica, 

Bundle 19. 

e. Class CCCXC. Board of Trade Commercial 1688-1792, 

Bundle 5. 

f. Class CCCXC. Board of Trade Journal, Bundle 10. 
V. Custom House Papers. 

a. Custom House Series. 

1. Accounts. 

(a) Ledger of Imports and Exports, 1764- 
1765. 

b. Custom House Miscellanea, 16. 

VI. Domestic State Papers. 

a. Entry Book Classified, Book 140. 

VII. Pipe Office Papers. 

a. Declared Accounts. 

1. Customs, 1765-1770. Rolls, 1264-1265. 

VIII. Treasury Board Papers. 

a. Class I. In Letters. Original Correspondence, Bun- 
dles, 351; 399; 400; 451; 462; 463; 471; 476; 482; 
491. 



* Some of the references to these bundles were among the extracts 
made by Mr. G. L. Beer. 



Trade: of the: Delaware: District 335 

b. Class II. Out Letters. 

1. Customs, Vols. 27, 28. 

2. Various XVIII, Vol. I. 

c. Class VII. Miscellanea Various — Shipping Returns, 

Bundle 45. 

IX. Treasury Solicitor Papers. 

a. State of the question between the Treasury and the 
East India Company respecting the tea-duties, 
Bundle 3321. 

B. Custom House, London. 

I. Custom House Establishment Books, Sept. 8, 1767, Jan. 5, 
1776. 29 Vols. 

C. House of Lords, London. 

I. House of Lords Mss. Collection dated 1763-1775. 

D. British Museum, London. 

I. Additional Mss. 15,484, 33,030 and 37,021. 

E. Friends Reference Library, London. 

I. Collection of Mss. 4 — Letters to and from Philadelphia, 1757. 

F. Pennsylvania Historical Society, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

I. Custom House Papers, 1704-1713. 

II. Society of Collection — Letters of Merchants. 

III. Penn. Letter Book IX. 

IV. Penn. Mss., Vol. X. 

V. Pennsylvania Historical Society Mss. 

PRINTED SOURCES 

A. Records. 

I. Charter of William Penn and Laws of the Province of Penn- 
sylvania from 1682-1700. Published by J. B. Linn, Harris- 
burg, Pennsylvania, 1879. 

II. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania. 

16 Vols. ed. by Samuel Hazard, Philadelphia, 1852. 

III. Documents relative to the Colonial History of New York, VII. 

11 Vols. ed. by E. B. O'Callaghan, Albany, New York, 

1856. 

IV. Pennsylvania Archives. 

1st Series. 12 Vols. ed. by Samuel Hazard, Philadelphia, 

1852-1907. 
2d Series. 19 Vols. ed. by W. H. Egle and J. B. Linn, 

Harrisburg, 1874-93. 
3d Series. 30 Vols. ed. by W. H. Egle and G. E. Read, 

1897-1898. 
4th Series. 12 Vols. ed. by G. E. Read, Harrisburg, Pa., 

1900. 

V. Statutes of the Realm to 1713. 

12 Vols. London, 1810-1828. 

VI. (British) Statutes at Large. 

109 Vols. ed. by Danby Pickering, London, 1762. 



336 Smith Cou^ge: Studies in History 

VII. Statutes of Pennsylvania at Large. 

14 Vols. ed. by J. T. Mitchell and Henry Flanders, Harris- 
burg, Pa., 1896-1910. 

VIII. Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of 
Pennsylvania, Vol. III. 
6 Vols. Philadelphia, 1752-1776. 

B. General Works. 

I. Chalmers, George, Introduction to the Revolt of the Colonies. 

2 Vols. Boston, 1845. 

II. De Bow, J. D. B., The Industrial Review of the Southern and 

Western States. 

3 Vols. New Orleans, 1852-3. 

III. Ford, P. L., Writings of John Dickinson. (The Historical 

Society of Pennsylvania Memoirs. Vol. XIV.) Phila- 
delphia, 1895. 

IV. Macpherson, David, Annals of Commerce, Manufactures, 

Fisheries, and Navigation, with brief notices of the arts 
and sciences connected with them. 
3 Vols. London, 1805. 

V. Pitkins, Timothy, A Statistical View of the Commerce of the 
United States of America. 
New York, 1817. 

VI. Smyth, A. H. (Editor), Writings of Benjamin Franklin. 
10 Vols. New York, 1905. 

C. Pamphlets.* 

I. Bernard, Governor, Select Letters on the Trade and Govern- 
ment of America. Boston, 1774. 

II. Pownall, Thomas, Administration of the Colonies. London, 
1768. 

III. Smith, William, A Brief State of the Province of Pennsyl- 

vania in 1755. New York, 1764. 

IV. Anonymous, Observations of the Merchants at Boston on the 

Several Acts of Parliament respecting American Com- 
merce and Revenue. Boston, 1770. 

D. Newspapers and Magazines. 

I. The Annual Register. Vol. VIII. 
158 Vols. London, 1758-1914. 

II. Pennsylvania Magazine of History. Vol. IV. 

Edited by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 
38 Vols. Philadelphia, 1877-1914. 

III. Pennsylvania Gazette. 

Edited by Benjamin Franklin, Philadelphia, 1729-1766. 



* A splendid collection of pamphlets may be f onud in All Souls 
Library, Oxford, England, where there are thirteen volumes of the most 
important pamphlets written between 1760-1776. 



Trade: of the Delaware District 337 

IV. Broadsides. (Historical Society of Pennsylvania.) 
A. B. I., No. 129. 

SECONDARY WORKS 

A. General Histories. 

I. Hanna, C. A., The Wilderness Trail. 2 Vols. New York, 1911. 
II. Madison, James, Letters and Other Writings. New York, 1889. 

III. Osgood, Herbert L., The American Colonies in the Seven- 

teenth Century. 3 Vols. New York, 1904-7. 

IV. Rossiter, William, A Century of Population. Philadelphia, 

1894. 
V. Swank, James Moore, History of the Manufacture of Iron 
in all Ages and particularly in the United States from 
Colonial Times to 1891. Philadelphia, 1892. 

B. Monographs. 

I. Bagnall, W. R., The Textile Industries of the United States. 
2 Vols. Cambridge, 1893. 
II. Bean, Theodore W., History of Montgomery County. Phila- 
delphia, 1884. 

III. Beer, G. L., 

a. The Commercial Policy of England towards the Ameri- 

can Colonies. 

Columbia University Studies III, No. 2. 

b. British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765. 

New York, 1907. 

c. The Origins of the British Colonial System, 1578-1660. 

New York, 1908. 

d. The Old Colonial System. Part I. 

2 Vols. New York, 1912. 

IV. Bishop, J. L., A History of American Manufactures from 

1608-1860. 

2 Vols. Philadelphia, 1861-1864. 
V. Giesecke, A. A., American Commercial Legislation before 
1789. 

Philadelphia, 1910. 
VI. Goss, John Dean, The First Stages of the Tariff Policy of 
the United States from Colonial Times to the McKinley 
Administration Bill. 

Columbia University Studies in History, Economics and 
Politics. Vol. I., No. 2. New York, 1891. 

VII. Lincoln, C. H., The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsyl- 
vania. University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia, 1901. 
VIII. Lord, E. L., Industrial Experiments in the British Colonies 
of North America. (Johns Hopkins University Press.) 
Baltimore, 1898. 

C. Articles. 

I. Andrews, C. M., Colonial Commerce. (The American His- 
torical Review, Vol. XX, pp. 43-63.) New York, 1915. 



338 Smith College Studies in History 

II. Farrand, M., The Taxation of Tea, 1767-1773. (The Ameri- 
can Historical Review, Vol. Ill, pp. 266-269). 
New York, 1898. 

III. Fisher, W. C, American Trade Regulations before 1789. 

(Papers of the American Historical Association, Vol. 
Ill, pp. 223-249.) 
New York, 1889. 

IV. Smith, W. R., Sectionalism in Pennsylvania during the Revo- 

lution. (Political Science Quarterly, Vol. XXIV, pp. 208- 

235.) 

New York. 

V. Taylor, Thomas B., The Philadelphia Counterpart of the 
Boston Tea Party. (Friends' Historical Society Bulletins 
Nos. 2 and 3.) Philadelphia, 1913. 

VI. Morriss, U. S., Colonial Trade of Maryland, 1689-1715. 
(Johns Hopkins University Studies, Series XXXII.) 
Baltimore, 1914. 

VII. Root, W. T., The Relations of Pennsylvania with the British 
Government, 1696-1765. 
Philadelphia, 1912. 

MAPS 

A. Eshleman, H. Frank, Map of the Earliest Highways leading from the 

Delaware and Schuylkill Rivers to the Susquehannah River and 
its branches. Lancaster, Pa., 1907. 

B. Schull, Nicholas, Map of Pennsylvania, 1759. Pennsylvania Archives, 

3rd Series, App. I-IX. 

C. Scull, William, Map of Pennsylvania, 1770. Ibid. 

calendars 

A. Andrews, C. M., and Davenport, Frances G., Guide to the Manu- 

script Materials for the History of the United States to 1783, 
in the British Museum, in Minor London Archives, and in the 
Libraries of Oxford and Cambridge. 
Washington, D. C, 1908. * 

B. Andrews, C. M., Guide to the Materials for American History to 

1783 in the Public Record Office of Great Britain. 
2 Vols. Washington, D. C, 1912-1914. 



APPENDICES 



APPENDIX I 



An account of goods and merchandise imported 
Pennsylvania from Christmas 1699 to Christmas 1700 

Quantity 
Cwt. 

Grocery — 

Ginger dry 2 

Molasses 177 

Rice 7 

Sugar Brown 4 

Indigo 

Skins — 

Bear, black 

Beaver 

Buck in hair 

Cat 

Elk 

Fisher 

Fox 

Mink 

Musquash 

Otter 

Raccoon 

Wolf 

Braziletto 5 

Tobacco 

Whale fins 5 

At Value- 
Cow horns 

Buck skins 



into England from 



Customs 



larier j_,us. 


£0 


13s. 


Od. 


i 13 


11 


4 


2 


3 5 




13 


7 


.. 130 


1 


6 


7 


.. 452 


64 


2 


7 


.. 121 


5 


14 


5 


.. 516 


9 


3 


1 


.. 826 


2 


6 


10 


14 




19 


11 


96 


3 


8 


1 


. . 1322 


12 


10 


4J4 


.. 783 


8 


6 


8 


.. 2163 


7 


13 


5 


.. 116 


3 


2 


3 


. . 4721 


16 


4 


6 


.. 173 


26 


4 


6 


'. '. 64,791 


1414 


6 


6 


.. 


7 


3 


1% 






7 


4y 2 


. , . . 


9 


16 


9% 



*C. O. 5:1291. This list was signed, Walter Cox. 



APPENDIX II 

EXPORTS FROM PENNSYLVANIA TO LONDON IN ENGLISH 

SHIPS, 1764-1765* 



3d. 
9 





Amount 




Merchandise Tons Cwt. 


Qtr. I,bs. 


Estimated first cost or value 


Ashes Pott 


. . . 


7,989 


At 3d. lb. £99 17s 


Copper Ore 


. 113 


3 24 


At 2/6 cwt. 14 4 


Castoreum 




.. 11 


At 4-6* lb. 2 15 


Cort'x Elutheria . 


. 25 


2 27 


At 28-32* lb. 38 12 


Winteranus ... 




. . 8,980 


At 2-3d. lb. 93 10 


Gum Copal 


. .. 


.. 393 


At 9-1 Id. lb 24 10 



6 

10 

2 



* Customs, III, 65. 



340 



Smith College Studies in History 



Amount 
Merchandise Tons Cwt. Qtr. I,bs. 

Oyl Chymical 203 

Sassafras 19 

Rad. Serp'ntaria 130 

Sarsaparilla . . 150 

Sperma Cati 50 

Sassafras 2 

Turpentine 875 2 10 

Elephants Teeth 3 1 2 

Groc. Pimento .1,479 

Rice 1171 3 21 

Indigo 2,500 

Iron Bar 54 19 2 9 

Pig Iron 170 17 8 

Oil Train 94 2 32 gals. 

Pitch and Tar. . 210 lasts 7 bbls. 

Rozin 12 2 

Skins : 

Bear, Black.. 1,178 No. 

Beaver 81 

Pelts 1,382 

Buck, deer hair 10,397 

Calabor 

Cat 1,480 Nos. 

Coney 14 

Deer 208 lb. 

Elk 77 No. 

Fisher 252 

Fox, Ord'y .. 1,802 

Martin 143 

Mink 10,848 

Musquash . . . 9,258 

Otter 2,439 

Panther 2 

Raccoon .... 2,428 

Wolf 81 

Spirits, Rum . . 2,894 Gals. 

Sturgeon 214 Kegs 

Wax, Bees 180 cwt. 1 gr. 4 et. 

Whale Fins .... 5 cwt. 3 gr. 12 et. 
Wine, Madeira 64 tons 3:11 
Boat Boards... 13,000 Feet 
Brazielletto ... 3 Tons 

Cedar Planks.. 35 No. 

Fustick 94 Tons 

Oak Planks.... 65,000 Feet 

Logwood 184 Tons 

Mahogany 5 Tons 

Plank 509 No. 

Pine Boards . . 6 No. 

Walnut 305 Logs 



Estimated first cost or value 



At 4-6*. lb. 


50 


15 




At 6-8s. cwt. 




1 


2 


At 2-3*. lb. 


16 


5 




At U-\3d. lb. 


7 


10 




At 5-8£ lOd. cwt. 


7 








At 6-8*. cwt. 




14 




At 9-11*. cwt. 


437 


15 


11 


At 4/10-7£ cwt. 


18 


15 


9 


At 5-7d. lb. 


36 


19 


6 


At 14-18*. cwt. 


937 


11 




At 12-18d. lb. 


156 


5 




At 9/10-10£ 10*. ton 






At 18-22*. ton 


170 


17 


1 


At 11-13£ ton 


1,135 


10 


4 


At 8-10£ last 


1,895 


5 





At 8-10*. cwt. 


5 


12 


16 


At 6-7d. 


36 


16 


3 


At 3-4*. 


14 


3 


6 


At 20-40*. 100 No 








At 2-3*. 


1,299 


12 


6 




3 


1 


8 


At 2 


12 


6 


8 


At 10-14d. Doz. 




14 




At 12-18 


13 






At 6-7*. 


25 





6 


At 6-Sd. 


7 


7 





At 14-6d. 


112 


12 


6 


At 7-9d. 


4 


15 


4 


At 20-2U. 


994 


8 





At 5-7d. 


231 


9 





At 3-4*. 


426 


16 


6 


At 20*. 


2 








At 5-7d. 


60 


14 





At 4-6 


20 


5 





At 20d. Gall. 


241 


3 


4 


At 3-4*. Keg 


37 


9 





At 45-55*. cwt. 


450 


18 


9 


At 7-9£ cwt. 


46 


17 


1 


At 19-23£ Ton 


1,360 


13 


4 


At Id. 


54 


3 


4 


At 6-8£ Ton 


21 






At 5*. 


8 


15 




At 8-10£ Ton 


846 






At 2d. 


541 


13 


4 


At 10-14£ 


2,220 






At 7-9£ 


40 






At 20*. 


509 






At 30*. 


9 






At 20*. 


305 







Trade: of the: Delaware District 341 



Amount 
Merchandise Tons Cwt. Qtr. I^bs. Estimated first cost or value 

Pipe 306:3:15 No. At 14-16*. 430 3 1 

Staves 306 cwt. 3 gr. 15 No. At 16-8*. 107 8 1 

Pink Roots .... 83 lbs. 753 

Sails made .... 48 Ells 3 

Total 16,042 4 1 

APPENDIX III 
IMPORTS TO PENNSYLVANIA FROM LONDON, 1764-1765* 

Eng-. Manufacture Amount Cost Amount of the value 

Allom 17 cwt. At 21*. cwt. £17 17*. Od. 

Apoth. Ware .... 417 cwt. At 40*. cwt. 834 

Apparel Parcels.. 11 No. At 20*. 11 

Bags 217 doz. At 5-7*. doz. 65 2 

Beer 8 tons 3 hhds. 9 gal. At 4-6£ Ton 43 18 6 

Books 119 cwt. lqr. lb. At 3-5£ cwt. 477 

Brass Wrought . . 393 cwt. qr. 20 lb. At 4-5£ cwt. 1,769 6 

Bridles 1 doz. At 8-14*. doz. 11 

Cards new Wool. 362 (895 doz.) At 7-12*. doz 171 19 

Cards playing ... 39 cwt. 3 qr. At 20-25*. cwt. 44 14 4 

Chariots 5 No. At 15-25£ 100 

Cheese 158 cwt. qr. At 20-28*. cwt. 189 12 

Coals 63 At 22-26*. cwt. 75 12 

Coffer Wrought.. 247 cwt. 2 qr. At 5-5-12 cwt. 1,311 15 

Cordage 1,540:0:0 At 20-26*. cwt. 1,771 

Fustians 40 no. At 20s. per no. 40 

Gartering Crewel. 50 Gross At 10*. gross. 25 

Glass 67,125 no. At 5,100 per no. 167 16 3 

Glass Green 155 cwt. qr. 5 lb.At 10*. per cwt. 77 10 5 

Glass W. Flint... 49 cwt. 2qr. 221 lb.At 20s. per cwt. 49 13 10 

Glass Windows . . 13 chests At 14-25*. chest. 13 

Gloves, leather . . 3,828 doz. At 4-8*. doz. 1,148 8 

Grindlestones ... 40 • At 25-35*. 60 

Gunpowder 297 cwt. 2qr. 5 At 3-3£ 15 cwt. 1,064 4 2 

Haberdashery . . . 2,575 cwt. 1 qr. At 40*. cwt. 5,150 10 

Harness, Coaches. 3 pairs n. At 40-60*. pair 7 10 
Hats : 

Beavers, Castors 403 doz. At 3-5£ doz. 1,612 

Felt 1,293 3/4 doz. At 20-25*. doz. 1,455 18 4 

Chip 140 doz. At 4-6*. doz. 35 

Straw 40 doz. At 3-4/6 doz. 7 10 

Hempseed 12 1/2 qr. At 20*. qr. 12 10 

Iron Nails 99 cwt. At 30-40*. cwt. 1,573 5 

Iron Wrought . . . 3,354 tons, 1 cwt, 

22 qr. At 2/10-3i cwt. 9,224 14 6 

Lead and Shot... 61 ton 4 cwt. 2qr. OAt 10-11 per ton 642 17 3 

Leather Wrought. 7,694 lbs. At 2-2/6*. lb. 865 11 6 

Linen : 9,848 no. At 30-40 17,234 

* Customs, III, 65. 



342 



Smith College Studies in History 



Eng\ Manufacture Amount 

British 52,845 yds. 

Irish 204,601 yds. 

Sail 12,780 Ells 

Lithrage of lead. 45 cwt. 2:0 

Pewter 826 cwt. 

Pictures or Prints 18 cwt. 2 qr. 

Saddles, Great... 12 No. 

Saddles, Small .. 12 No. 

Shovels Shod .... 30 doz. 

Silk in pieces 7,541 lbs. 1 oz. 

Silk Stitch, Sew'g 2,521 lbs., 9 oz. 

Steel 700 cwt. 

Tobacco pipes . . . 338 Gross 

Vetures, Double.. 96 no. 

Watches, Silver.. 12 No. 

Clothes and Bags. 1,070 no. 

Double 

Minikins 816 

Single 1,020 

Long 4 

Remnants 100 

Short 1,114 no. 

Spanish 572 

Cottons 920 

Welch plains .... 1,500 (4,100) 

Flannel 62,400 Yards 

Frize 1,700 (2,000) 

Kersies 205 no. 

Perfits and Serges 440 lbs. 

Stock'g for child'n 10 doz. 

Stock'g for men . . 6,722 doz. 

Stuffs 293,140 lbs. 

Stuff, Silk (Inde) 581 lbs., 9 oz. 

Stuff, Silk worst. 4,474 lbs., 5 oz. 

Cabinet ware 

Colours, painters. 

Cottons, Linens . . 46,301 sq. yds. 

Goods, several . . . 

Plate Wrought .. 600 oz. 

Plate Glass White 26 cwt. :7 

Stationery 

Toys 



Cost Amount of the value 

At 6-18 yds. 2,642 5 

At 6-lSd. yd. 10,230 1 

At 12*. 639 

At 7-11 cwt. 20 9 6 

At 3-4£ cwt. 2,891 

At 25-30 cwt. 27 15 

At 30-40*. 21 

At 13-17*. 9 

At 11-13*. lbs. 18 

At 30-40*. lb. 13,196 17 2 

At 30-40*. lb. 4,412 14 

At 27-30 cwt. 997 10 

At 12c?. gross. 16 18 

At 25-30*. 49 10 

At2:10-5£ 45 

At 3-4£ 4,012 10 

At 7-8£ 10*. no. 6,324 

At 34-35*. no. 2,014 10 

At 7-10£ 23 5 

At 18-246?. lb. 8 15 

At 10-13£ no. 12,811 

At 4-6£ 2,860 

At 5-18£ 100 goods 54 5 7 

At 5-6£ 100 goods 27 10 
At 8-186?. yd. 3,380 

At 20-306?. yd. 117 1 8 

At 20-50*. 358 15 

At 3-3/6*. lb. 71 10 

At 4-14*. doz. 4 10 

At 24-44*. doz. 11,427 8 

At 2-3*. lb. 36,642 10 

At 2*. 3/6 lb. 79 19 3 

At 2-3*. 6d. lb. 615 4 4 
10 
100 
10,417 
46,102 
200 
720 

423 18 
34 



APPENDIX IV 
PENNSYLVANIA IMPORTS AND EXPORTS, 1702-1763 

Value of British 





Goods, Wares 




Value of Foreign 
















and Merchan- 


i 


Goods, Wares and 


Total Value 




Value of 






dise Imported 




Merchandise ini 


- 


Imports 




Exports 






into Pa. 




ported into Pa. 




into Pa. 




from Pa. 




1702 














£2,997 


0s. 


Od. 


£3,347 


0s. Od, 


1707 














9,342 








4,145 








1712 














14,365 








786 








1717 














8,464 








1,471 








1722 














22,505 








4,499 








1727 














26,397 








6,882 








1732 














31,979 








12,823 








1732 














41,698 








8,524 








1737 














56,690 








15,198 





0* 


1740 


£46,471 


12* 


9d. £10,28 


2s. 


Od. 


56,751 


14 


9 


15,048 


12 





1741 


78,032 


13 


1 


12,977 


18 


10 


91,070 


11 


11 


17,158 





8 


1742 


60,836 


17 


1 


14,458 


5 


3 


75,295 


3 


4 


8,527 


12 


8 


1743 


60,120 


4 


10 


19,220 


1 


6 


79,340 


6 


4 


9,596 


3 


6 


1744 


47,595 


18 


2 


14,618 


8 


4 


62,214 


6 


6 


7,446 


7 


1 


1745 


41,237 


2 


3 


13,043 


8 


8 


54,280 


10 


11 


10,130 


9 


2 


1746 


55,595 


19 


7 


18,103 


12 


7 


73,699 


12 


7 


15,779 


7 


4 


1747 


73,819 


2 


8 


8,585 


14 


11 


82,404 


17 


1 


3,832 


3 


3 


1748 


55,039 


3 


6 


20,291 


1 


4 


75,330 


5 


9 


12,363 


14 


2 


1749 


191,833 





6 


46,804 


2 


4 


238,637 


2 


10 


14,944 


8 





1750 


156,945 


7 


10 


60,767 


13 





217,713 


10 





28,191 








1751 


129,503 


17 


1 


61,413 


8 





190,917 


5 


1 


23,870 


19 


10 


1752 


123,872 


14 





79,794 


5 


11 


201,666 


19 


11 


29,978 


8 


3 


1753 


182,355 


2 


7 


63,289 


11 


4 


245,644 


13 


11 


38,527 


12 


5 


1754 


188,981 


5 


6 


55,666 


9 


2 


244,647 


14 


8- 


30,649 


16 


10 


1755 


108,579 


5 


7 


35,877 


1 


7 


144,456 


7 


2 


32,336 


10 


6 


1756 


159,222 


10 


6 


40,947 


9 


3 


200,167 


19 


9 


20,095 


14 


7 


1757 


206,857 


12 





61,568 


14 


6 


268,426 


6 


6 


14,190 





9 


1758 


194,745 


16 


9 


66,207 


14 


4 


260,953 


11 


1 


21,383 


14 10 


1759 


420,271 


18 


6 


77,889 


6 


9 


498,161 


5 


3 


22,404 


13 


1 


1760 


606,054 


9 


4 


101,944 


2 


8 


707,988 


12 





22,754 


15 


3 


1761 


172,698 


14 


11 


31,368 


7 


4 


204,067 


2 


3 


39,170 








1762 


181,053 


4 





25,146 


14 


8 


206,199 


18 


8 


38,091 


2 


2 


1763 


233,012 


9 


6 


51,140 


6 


6 


284,152 


16 





38,228 


10 


2 


1764 


359,934 





2 


75,257 


3 


10 


435,191 


14 





36,258 


18 


1 


1765 


283,514 


3 


2 


79,854 


15 


2 


363,368 


17 


5 


25,148 


10 


10 


1766 


258,467 


17 


8 


68,846 


7 


7 


327,314 


5 


3 


26,851 


3 


1 


1767 


301,048 


9 


3 


70,781 


19 


7 


375,830 


8 


10 


37,641 


17 


10 


1768 


331,050 


6 





101,057 


11 


4 


432,107 


17 


4 


59,406 


8 


5 


1769 


147,345 


14 


1 


52,564 


3 


10 


199,909 


17 


11 


26,111 


11 


4 


1770 


110,121 


14 


3 


24,760 


1 


2 


134,881 


15 


5 


28,109 


5 


11 


1771 


590,723 


13 


2 


138,021 


6 


8 


728,744 


19 


10 


31,615 


9 


9 


1772 


438,348 


4 


7 


69,561 


9 


5 


507,909 


14 





29,133 


12 


3 


1773 


252,186 


16 


3 


101,760 


13 


4 


426,448 


17 


3 


36,652 


8 


9t 



* B. T. Commercial Series 414. (Old number). 

t H. of L. Mss., Extract from a table of exports and imports of 
England with the North American Colonies. 



VITA 

I, Mary Alice Hanna, was born in Trenton, Missouri, July 13, 1886. 
My father was Samuel C. Hanna and my mother, Mary Lydia Hanna. 
Upon the completion of my secondary education, which I received from 
the Trenton High School, I entered the University of Missouri in the 
Autumn of 1905. I received from that institution the degrees of Bachelor 
of Arts (1909) and Bachelor of Science in Education (1911). For two 
years (1909-1911) I taught History and Latin in the high school of Van- 
dalia, Missouri, and in the Autumn of 1911 became a graduate student 
at Bryn Mawr College. In 1912-13 I held the fellowship in history at 
Bryn Mawr and in the spring of 1913 was awarded the Mary E. Garrett 
Fellowship for a year of study in Europe. The time was spent as a 
student in the London School of Economics and University College, 
London, and as a research student in the Public Record Office and the 
British Museum. On my return to America in 1914 I was made scholar 
in history and fellow by courtesy at Bryn Mawr College. During the 
years 1915-17 I was head of the history department at the Schuyler School 
in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania. 

As a graduate student at Bryn Mawr College I attended the courses 
given by Dr. William Roy Smith, Dr. Marian Parris Smith, Dr. Clarence 
Haring and Dr. James Miller Leake. In London I attended the courses 
given at University College by Professor A. F. Pollard and those given 
at the London School of Economics by Dr. Lilian Knowles, Dr. A. L. 
Bowley and Hubert Hall, F. S. A., Assistant Keeper of the Public Records. 

I am especially indebted to Dr. William Roy Smith and Dr. Marian 
Parris Smith, who have directed me in the pursuance of my graduate 
studies at Bryn Mawr College. 

My indebtedness in connection with this dissertation has been expressed 
in the preface. 



INDEX 



Absenteeism, 280. 

Adams, G. B., 46. 

Admiralty, see vice-admiralty. 

Albany regency, 186 f. 

Albert, Archbishop of Mainz, 18, 

21f. 
Albert, Duke of Prussia, 20. 
Albert Achilles, 4, 11, 16, 22 f., 50, 

53, 57. 
Andros, Edmund, 177. 
Annual register, 76. 
Appointment, Council of, 177-8, 

181fr. 
Appointment, Power of, 150, 159., 

177ff., 181-88, 199ff., 207-14. 
Archives of Brandenburg, 3, 50. 

Baedeker, 28f. 

Baltimore, Trade with, 243. 

Bancroft, George, articles in North 
American Review, 70; early 
life, 67-8 ; style criticized by 
Sparks, 90, 96, 120fT.; transla- 
tions by, 81 ff. 

Bancroft Manuscripts, 67. 

Barbauld, Anna Laetitia, HOff. 

Beard, C. A., quoted, 201-2. 

Berlin, 16f., 27ff., 38, 40, 58. 

Black, Frank S., Governor, 194. 

Brandenburg, 3-64; see Hohenzol- 
lern Household. 

Brown, Josiah, 277-8. 

Bryce, James, quoted, 150. 

Buchholtzer, G., 17. 

"Buckstail faction," 186. 

Budget, see Finance. 

Buttmann's "Greek Grammar," 70, 
71, 115, 117. 

California, 166. 

Cape Nicola Mole, 331-2. 

Cattle, 252. 

Certification of Ships, 289. 

Chancery, 58. 

"Classical learning," 72ff., 77. 

Clergy of Brandenburg, 9, 25, 29f. 

Cleveland, Grover, 191, 194, 197. 

Clinton, DeWitt, 184ff., 189, 193. 



Clinton, George, 181ff., 189. 
"Collectanea Graeca Majori," 98- 

99, 105f., 110, 113. 
Colonial act of 1673, 285. 
Colonization, 6ff., 32ff., 260. 
Commissions, state, 148, 171, 188. 
Connecticut, 161. 
Connecticut River Valley, projected 

article on, 117, 119, 127, 128. 
Consistorium, 32. 
Constitutional Convention, Albany, 

1915, 203-223. 
Cornbury, Lord, 177. 
Cornell, Alonzo B., governor, 194. 
Cosby, William, 177. 
Customs Board, 282-85, 324-5. 

Delaware, 159, 168, 169. 

Delaware district, isolation from 
England, 247-8; trade bounda- 
ries, 242. 

Dissolution, power of, 156-7, 162, 
214. 

Distelmeier, L,., 52, 56. 

Distilleries, 259. 

Dix, John A., governor, 194f. 

Droysen, J. G., 5, 20, 28f., 46. 

East India Company, 299-305. 

Edward II of England, 3, 14, 45. 

Efficiency and Economy, Depart- 
ment of, 172, 203, 204, 209. 

Estates of Brandenburg, 4 ff., con- 
trol over taxation, llff., compo- 
sition, 29f., records, 47ff., ap- 
proval of Household Ordi- 
nance, 54f. 

Estimates, Board of, 216-17. 

Fame (ship), 270-1. 

Fee system, 281, 322-3, 329-30. 

Finance, 155-7, 175-6, 180, 197-8, 

200, 215-21, 223-5. 
Fisheries, 256, 262. 
Florida, 166ff. 

Flower, Roswell P., governor, 194. 
Fliigel's German dictionary, 142-3. 
Franklin, Benjamin, 315-16. 



346 



Smith College Studies in History 



Frederick the Great, 16. 
Frederick I of Brandenburg, 5. 
Frederick William ; see Great 

Elector. 
Free trade, 245. 

French colonies, trade with, 288-9. 
Fur trade, 252. 

Georgia, 159ff., 166, 167. 

Germantown, Pa., 250. 

Gneist, R., 45f. 

"Goethe, Life and Genius of," 74, 
77, 80ff., 85. 

Goodnow, Frank J., 209. 

Governor, administrative power, 
148-9, 181-88, 198-214; election, 
158-9, legislative powers, 173-5, 
188-98; message, 191-2; present 
status, 223-26; term of office, 
59, 160, 166, 170; under pro- 
posed constitution of 1915, 
222-3. 

Governors, colonial, 152-7. 

Grain trade, 7ff., 33ff., 249-51, 264, 
318-20. 

Great Elector, 4, 6, 9, 39f., 43. 

Greek grammars, 73. 

"Greek Lexicography," 113f., 116ff. 

Grist mills, 250. 

Hans, Markgraf of the Neumark, 

12, 21ff., 27, 53. 
Harbors of Pennsylvania, 267. 
Hass, M., 3, 4, 44-54. 
Hazel wood, Thomas, 271-2. 
Hedwig, wife of Joachim I, 20f., 

28, 31. 
Hemans, Felicia ,108, 109, 111, 112, 

126. 
Hemp, 254. 

Herder, "Writings of," 88-89. 
Hill, David B., Governor, 194, 198. 
Hintze, O., 4, 44f., 50. 
Hoffmann, John T., governor, 194f. 
Hohenzollern, Electors of Branden- 
burg: 
Frederick I (1412-1440), 5. 
Albert Achilles (1440-1486), 

4, 11, 16, 22ff., 50, 53, 57. 
Joachim I (1499-1535), 12, 
16ff., 34. 



Joachim II, (1535-1531), 3- 

64, passim. 
John George (1571-1598), 

13ff., 20, 25, 51, 56. 
Great Elector (1640-1688), 

4, 6, 9, 39f., 43. 
Frederick the Great (1740- 
1788), 16. 
Holtze, F., 4, 14. 

Household, Hohenzollern, cost, 
10ff., 53, 57-60; development, 
39-43; sources, 47-60; cleavage, 
57-60; personnel, 61-64; mar- 
shal, 40f., 53ff., 61; master, 40; 
chamberlains, 40, 61 ; manager 
of the storehouse, 40, 52; chan- 
cery, 58, 63 ; Kammergericht, 
37, 42, 44, 48; Rentei (ex- 
chequer), 63. 
Household manufactures, 260, 307. 
Household Ordinances, 3, 44-64. 
Hughes, Charles E., governor, 174, 

192f., 195, 198, 200f., 216. 
Hunting, 7, 13. 

Illinois, 162. 

Indians, trade with, 253. 

Iron, 257f. 

Italy, 101, 102. 

Jacob's "Greek Reader," 71, 73. 

Jacob's "Latin Reader," 93, 97. 

Jagow, Matthias von, 27. 

Jay, John, 182f. 

Joachim I, Elector of Brandenburg, 

12, 16ff., 34. 
Joachim II, Elector of Branden- 
burg: 

Importance, 3-5, 39ff. ; con- 
flict with the estates, 5-14; 
debts, 6-14, 24, 53; religion, 
14-32 ; wives, 19 ff. ; inheri- 
tance, 21 ff., peasants, 32- 
39; Household Ordinances, 
50-55 ; household personnel, 
55-64. 
Joachim Friedrich, 51. 
John George, Elector of Branden- 
burg, 13f., 20, 25, 51, 56. 
"Joseph II of Austria," 140-1. 
"Journal of a Tour in Italy," 84, 
87, 100. 



Index 



347 



Kammergericht, 37, 42, 44, 48. 
Kentucky, 161 f. 
Klinkenborg, M., 4. 
Koser, R., 5. 
Kostgeld, 58f., 63. 

Legislation, 173-4, 188-93. 
Legislative bodies, colonial, 153-7, 

177. 
Lutheranism, 14-32. 

Machiavelli, 15. 

Madeira, trade with, 264. 

Maine, 161. 

Manufactures of Pennsylvania, 

307-9. 
Marcy, William L., governor, 193. 
Maryland, 166ff., 262. 
Massachusetts, 158, 159. 
Maurice of Saxony, 15. 
Meech, Captain, 269-70. 
Melanchthon, 26f., 31. 
Merchants of London, memorial, 

318-20. 
Merchants of New York, 315-17. 
Militarism, 6. 
Mills' Hill, 224-225. 
Missouri, 162, 164. 
Molasses Act, 287 i. 
Monasteries, 30, 51. 
Moreland Act, 216. 
Municipal Research, Bureau of, 

204, 218, 224, 225. 
Mylius, 3, 47ff. 

Navigation acts, need of, 267, 274-5 ; 
act of 1660, 285 ; staple act, 285 ; 
colonial act, 285 ; molasses act, 
287-8 ; sugar act, 289-93 ; stamp 
act, 293-8; tea act, 299-305, 
Townshend act, 298-9. 

Neumark, see Hans. 

New England, trade with, 262. 

New Hampshire, 158ff., 168. 

New Jersey, 149, 160, 166. 

New York (colony), 154-55, 177. 

New York, constitution of 1777, 
177-8; 1821, 178; 1846, 178; 
1867, 179; 1872, 180, 199; 1894, 
180, 199ff., 223 ; 1915, 203-23. 

New York short ballot organiza- 
tion, 202. 

Nobility in Brandenburg, 6ff., 25, 
29f., 32ff., 54f., 61-64. 



Non-importation associations, 311- 

17. 
North American Review, 68ff., 74ff., 

82ff, 95f., 105-6, 109, 111, 126, 

130-1, 135. 
North Carolina, 153, 169. 
North Dakota, 176. 
Northampton, Mass., 67, 68, 75, 77, 

82, 94, 95, 97, 99, 100, 129. 
Northwest Ordinance, 162, 163. 
Nova Scotia, trade with, 262. 

Odell, Benjamin B., governor, 195, 

198. 
Ohio, 163, 166, 167, 169, 175. 
Oregon, 176. 

Pardons, 163, 178. 

Peasantry, 7ff., 19, 25, 32-39. 

Penn, John, 324. 

Penn, William, 256, 268-9, 279. 

Pennsylvania, 159ff., 164, 167. 

Philadelphia, 242, 244-5, 252-3, 

260-1, 276, 305, 311-8, 325-6. 
Philip IV of France, 3. 
"Physical Training," 90ff. 
Pickering, John, Greek and English 

Lexicon, 113f. 
Popkin, John S., 98-99, 105f., 110, 

113. 
Population of Brandenburg, 25. 
Prices, 36. 

Prince of Wales (ship), 326-9. 
Printing, Cost of, 75. 
Prussia, 6, 16, 18, 20, 40, 43. 
Prutz, H., 5, 20, 28f. 

Quary, Robert, 247ff., 267-8, 276ff. 

Ranke, L. von, 28. 
Removal, power of, 178, 180. 
Rhode Island, 168. 
Riedel, 3, 47ff. 

Robinson, Lucius, governor, 194. 
Roman Catholicism, 14-22. 
Roman Law, 5, 12, 41, 56. 
Roosevelt, Theodore, governor, 191, 

192. 
Root, Elihu, 213. 
Round Hill School, Northampton, 

Mass., 67, 78, 79, 97, 98. 
Ruby (ship), 330-2. 

Sage Hill, 224, 225. 



348 



Smith College Studies in History 



Saxe amendments, 207-8. 
Schapper, G., 4, 45, 50. 
Schiller, translations of, 70. 
Schlieben, Cristoph von, 51f. ; Eu- 

stachius von, 27, 53ff., 59f. 
Schmoller, G., 44. 
Seizures, 278-9, 326-7. 
Serfdom, 35ff. 
Seven Years War, 274. 
Sewell, Jonathan, 322. 
Seward, William H., 186-7, 189, 193. 
Shipbuilding, 254-5. 
Short ballot, 172, 201-3, 212-3, 214. 
Skinner council, 185f. 
Smith, G. E., 212, 221. 
Smuggling, 267-72, 320-32. 
"Somerville's Letters on France," 

75fL, 84. 
South Carolina, 149, 158, 166, 168f. 
Spandau, 28. 
Spangenberg, H., 4. 
Sparks, Jared, early life, 68-69. 
Sparks, Jared, travels, 132-3. 
Sparks Manuscripts, 67. 
Stamp act, 293-98. 
Standeakten, 4, 47ff. 
Staple act of 1663, 285. 
Steel mills, 258. 
Stolzel, A., 5, 44f. 
Sugar act of 1764, 286-92, 298. 
Sulzer, William, governor, 203. 

Tanner, Frederick C, 211-12, 214. 
Tariff legislation, 245-6. 
Taxes in Brandenburg, 9ff. 
Tea, duty on, 299-305. 
Tennessee, 163. 

Thirty day bill, 179, 180, 194ff. 
Ticknor, George, 82ff., 97. 



Tilden, Samuel J., governor, 194, 

197. 
Timber of Pennsylvania, 253-4. 
Tobacco, 249, 265, 266, 269. 
Tout, T. F., 45. 
Towns in Brandenburg, 7ff., 25, 29f., 

33ft. 
Townshend act, 298, 299, 304, 315. 
Trade, bill for regulating in North 

America, 332. 
Trade of Pennsylvania, export, 266, 

310; foreign, 285-93; import, 

266, 310; intercolonial, 286; 

southern, 261. 
Tuttle, H., 46. 

"Undine," 74, 75. 

Van Buren, Martin, 185f., 189. 

Vermont, 161. 

Veto, 150, 156, 158, 160ff., 165ff., 173, 

175, 177, 179, 180, 193-8, 208. 
Vice-Admiralty, 276-82, 329-30. 
Virginia, 154, 168, 169. 

Watterson, George, "Course of 
study preparatory to the Bar 
and the Senate," 78-79. 

Weed, Thurlow, 187. 

Weights and measures, 38f. 

West Indian trade, 262-3, 286-8. 

Whitman, Charles S., 224-5. 

Wilson, Woodrow, 174. 

Wine trade, 264-5. 

Wool trade, 259, 307-8. 

Worcester, J. E., "Elements of 
Geography," 76. 

Worcester, J. E., "Sketches of the 
Earth," 73, 76ft. 

Yates, Joseph, governor, 186, 193. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS % 

029 765 037 3 



